• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

0!

There are several reasons.
First, 0! is defined as 1 so that certain combinatorial formulas will have simple forms.
Second, the factorial function can be extended from the integers to the entire complex plane by use of the gamma function. As I recall, this leads to a definition of z! = gamma(z+1) for all complex z (except for z=0, -1, -2, -3,...). Since gamma(1)=gamma(2)=1 we have 0!=1.
 
Originally posted by: heliomphalodon
There are several reasons.
First, 0! is defined as 1 so that certain combinatorial formulas will have simple forms.
Second, the factorial function can be extended from the integers to the entire complex plane by use of the gamma function. As I recall, this leads to a definition of z! = gamma(z+1) for all complex z (except for z=0, -1, -2, -3,...). Since gamma(1)=gamma(2)=1 we have 0!=1.

wow
 
Originally posted by: MrDudeMan
Originally posted by: heliomphalodon
There are several reasons.
First, 0! is defined as 1 so that certain combinatorial formulas will have simple forms.
Second, the factorial function can be extended from the integers to the entire complex plane by use of the gamma function. As I recall, this leads to a definition of z! = gamma(z+1) for all complex z (except for z=0, -1, -2, -3,...). Since gamma(1)=gamma(2)=1 we have 0!=1.

wow

I second that.
 
Originally posted by: heliomphalodon
There are several reasons.
First, 0! is defined as 1 so that certain combinatorial formulas will have simple forms.
Second, the factorial function can be extended from the integers to the entire complex plane by use of the gamma function. As I recall, this leads to a definition of z! = gamma(z+1) for all complex z (except for z=0, -1, -2, -3,...). Since gamma(1)=gamma(2)=1 we have 0!=1.

I would add to that a simpler reason... factorial represents the number of times that a set of size n can be permuted.

A set of 0 things has 1 permutation... the permutation of nothing.

so 0! = 1

see: Factorial
 
Originally posted by: KillerCow
A set of 0 things has 1 permutation... the permutation of nothing.

so 0! = 1
With all due respect, I don't think that helps -- one could just as sensibly say that the empty set has zero permutations.
 
Originally posted by: KillerCow
With all due respect, I don't think that helps -- one could just as sensibly say that the empty set has zero permutations.

No, it has one: the empty set.

Right ... as soon as we agree that an empty set is something that exists, it has one state of existence, one permutation.
 
Originally posted by: heliomphalodon
There are several reasons.
First, 0! is defined as 1 so that certain combinatorial formulas will have simple forms.
Second, the factorial function can be extended from the integers to the entire complex plane by use of the gamma function. As I recall, this leads to a definition of z! = gamma(z+1) for all complex z (except for z=0, -1, -2, -3,...). Since gamma(1)=gamma(2)=1 we have 0!=1.

For some odd reason when I read the above, my liver busted. The pain has subsided now though and I think I'm going to pull through. This has never happened before.

Strange.
 
Originally posted by: KillerCow
With all due respect, I don't think that helps -- one could just as sensibly say that the empty set has zero permutations.

No, it has one: the empty set.

0 = {}
1 = {0}
2 = {0,1}

So 1 has 1 permutation, {0}. 0 has 0 permutations {}...
 
Sure, you cannot rearrange nothing, but neither can you rearrange one thing. Yet still you can HAVE one thing or nothing. There is one state of having nothing. 0!=1.
 
Back
Top