3
$\begingroup$

Why $0^0=I$?

I'd tried prove that considering $N^0$ where N is a Nilpotent matrix and then using the Cayley -Hamilton theorem

Thanks in advance.

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

The same caveats as for the exponential of real numbers apply here. If exponentiation means repeated multiplication, then $A^0 = I$ is the base case for all $A$. Exponentiation by a continuous real parameter, on the other hand, should insist that $\mathbf{0}^0$ is undefined.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Just like the empty sum is defined to be the additive identity $0$, the empty product is usually defined to be the multiplicative identity $1$. For matrices, the multiplicative identity is the identity matrix.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

I think it's just a definition (or notation).

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
-5
$\begingroup$

0^0 must be undefined because here in case of matrices if we take matrix's power than it implies the product of that matrix that power times and it does not make sense for the zero element's power zero I.e. Zeros' power zero , which is undefined.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.