Now that I read Dr. Anderson's web page - http://www.bookofparagon.com/ - I'm embarassed to even mention him on a message alongside Gene McDonnell's succinct persuasion. I guess the web page is worth a look if you are amused by quackery or make a hobby of the lunatic fringe (which I used to but now I'm into photography).
On 1/9/08, Eugene McDonnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Jan 9, 2008, at 11:22 AM, Devon McCormick wrote: > > > At least according to this guy: > > > http://www.bbc.co.uk/berkshire/content/articles/2006/12/12/nullity_061212_feature.shtml > ... > I've just reread my article "Zero Divided by Zero" in APL76 > Proceedings, and it gives the case that 0%0 is 0. I still believe that > the quotient should be zero, for if it is one, the least common > multiple function fails, the distributivity of division over addition > fails; the arc (or phase, amplitude, argument or angle) fails; the > dyadic logarithm has a problem; as does the average of an empty > vector ; lastly, with the complex domain in view, zero is the only > symmetrical choice. It was persuasive to Ken Iverson, who saw its > truth, and saw to it that APL gave the zero value, as does J. > > Eugene > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > -- Devon McCormick, CFA ^me^ at acm. org is my preferred e-mail ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
