Re: Compression test on permutations
- From: Thomas Richter <thor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 25 Apr 2007 21:06:21 GMT
erpy <info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
That's why I'm saying that zero is conveniently saw one way or the other
(i.e. as "no numbers" or as the number Zero).
If you have only the number zero, the product of zero "items" with zero
"items" is zero obviously, 0*0 = 0.
If you care about my two cents: I do not like both explanations. IMHO,
the best way to justify this convention is to look at the analytic
continuation of the faculty, namely the gamma function:
x! = Gamma(x+1) = \int_0^\infinity t^x exp(-t) dt
and you get from that 0! = Gamma(1) = 1 (by simply computing the integral).
And, by that you also find, as has already been argued, that (-1)! =
1/0, and indeed the gamma function has a simple pole at 0, (and so on
all other negative integers).
So long,
Thomas
.
- References:
- Compression test on permutations
- From: erpy
- Re: Compression test on permutations
- From: Mark Adler
- Re: Compression test on permutations
- From: erpy
- Re: Compression test on permutations
- From: Willem
- Re: Compression test on permutations
- From: erpy
- Re: Compression test on permutations
- From: Willem
- Re: Compression test on permutations
- From: Phil Carmody
- Re: Compression test on permutations
- From: erpy
- Re: Compression test on permutations
- From: Willem
- Re: Compression test on permutations
- From: erpy
- Compression test on permutations
- Prev by Date: Problem on Vitter algorithm
- Next by Date: Re: estimate zlib compression ratio?
- Previous by thread: Re: Compression test on permutations
- Next by thread: Re: Compression test on permutations
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|