Re: ANNOUNCE: NIST Considers Schneier Public Key Algorithm
From: Stephen Jones (s0zero9four2four7_at_sms.ed.ac.uk)
Date: 04/02/04
- Next message: James: "Re: smart card versus credit card"
- Previous message: DJohn37050: "Re: ANNOUNCE: NIST Considers Schneier Public Key Algorithm"
- In reply to: DJohn37050: "Re: ANNOUNCE: NIST Considers Schneier Public Key Algorithm"
- Next in thread: Bodo Moeller: "Re: ANNOUNCE: NIST Considers Schneier Public Key Algorithm"
- Reply: Bodo Moeller: "Re: ANNOUNCE: NIST Considers Schneier Public Key Algorithm"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2004 22:03:54 GMT
On 01 Apr 2004 21:42:44 GMT
djohn37050@aol.com (DJohn37050) wrote:
> 0 ^ 0 is defined to be 1 so that x ^ 0 is always defined and is
> continuous. Don Johnson
Not quite. It can be defined that way if your needs require it. The
function f(x) -> x^0 is said to have a removable singularity at 0,
meaning that the function
g(x) f(x) if x != 0
lim x->0 f(x) if x = 0
is continous.
-- If you can read this you've gone too far. Stephen Jones (Zombywuf) D5A4 5342 E7BD E524 710A <s0094247@sms.ed.ac.uk> E44F E997 4422 7FEC E44E
- Next message: James: "Re: smart card versus credit card"
- Previous message: DJohn37050: "Re: ANNOUNCE: NIST Considers Schneier Public Key Algorithm"
- In reply to: DJohn37050: "Re: ANNOUNCE: NIST Considers Schneier Public Key Algorithm"
- Next in thread: Bodo Moeller: "Re: ANNOUNCE: NIST Considers Schneier Public Key Algorithm"
- Reply: Bodo Moeller: "Re: ANNOUNCE: NIST Considers Schneier Public Key Algorithm"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]