Attempt to formally generalize log, exp functions to 3,4,5..(n,m) log exp - Printable Version +- Tetration Forum ( https://math.eretrandre.org/tetrationforum)+-- Forum: Tetration and Related Topics ( https://math.eretrandre.org/tetrationforum/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)+--- Forum: Mathematical and General Discussion ( https://math.eretrandre.org/tetrationforum/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)+--- Thread: Attempt to formally generalize log, exp functions to 3,4,5..(n,m) log exp ( /showthread.php?tid=175) |

RE: Attempt to formally generalize log, exp functions to 3,4,5..(n,m) log exp - JmsNxn - 04/14/2011
I think the easiest proof is which can only be true for a constant function. RE: Attempt to formally generalize log, exp functions to 3,4,5..(n,m) log exp - bo198214 - 04/15/2011
(04/14/2011, 11:16 PM)JmsNxn Wrote: I think the easiest proof is But this would need a bit more explanation *why* constancy follows from that. And then its not that short anymore |