3 ms·
That is the usual explanation, but I don't think that helps much since counting the number of ways to arrange nothing is confusing!
by johndcook 12y ago
That is the usual explanation, but I don't think that helps much since counting the number of ways to arrange nothing is confusing!
- ThrustVectoring 12y agoNot as confusing as you'd think, though, if you invoke the rule of product. The number of ways to do A and then B is the number of ways to do A times the number of ways to do B. The number of ways to do nothing and then A should be the same as the number of ways to do A. This implies that the number of ways to do nothing is the multiplicative identity, one.