complex iteration (complex "height") - 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: complex iteration (complex "height") ( /showthread.php?tid=87) |

complex iteration (complex "height") - Gottfried - 11/14/2007
Here I add two plots, which show bases s=2 and base s=sqrt(2), when tetrated to complex heights h. The height-parameter h follows the border of the complex unit-disk, so passes the coordinates (1,0),(0,i),(-1,0),(0,-i ) and is exp(2*Pi*I*x) . Also I have added 4 different scalings of h by the zoom-factor g, where g=1 (h is on the complexunit-circle), g=0.75 (h has radius 0.75), g=0.5 and g=0.25. This is a small picture for s=2: [attachment=127] and this a small picture for s=sqrt(2): [attachment=128] The curves for value g=1.25 (radius of h=1.25) are partly erratic; a better approximation-method should be able to smooth them a bit. Gottfried RE: complex iteration (complex "height") - bo198214 - 03/21/2008
@Gottfried: By which method did you compute your values? Just triggered by the question about b[4]I, I computed it by with being the regular iteration at the lower fixed point of (via the formula given here) for various bases : [attachment=261] This picture has also the disadvantage that you dont see which base is associated to which point on the curve. So I add a list of values: , Code: `1.01, 1.011233887 - 0.01003728120 I` There is also this interesting base for which is real. RE: complex iteration (complex "height") - Gottfried - 03/22/2008
bo198214 Wrote:@Gottfried: By which method did you compute your values? Hmm, for whatever reason I didn't find the pari.gp-syntax. I used the diagonalization and took complex powers for the diagonal. Maybe I did it using the square-bell-matrices directly or already using the shifting-to-triangular method, don't remember. What I have are the data for the plots in Excel. Since I'm busy tomorrow (tibet-action) I'll not be able to reproduce the syntax, however I could send you the data if this helps. Everything else I can do on sat evening or sunday, let's see. Gottfried RE: complex iteration (complex "height") - Ivars - 03/22/2008
@Henryk The next questions to provoke further thinking is : b[4](i*pi/2)=b[4]ln(i)? b[4](i/2)=? b[4](-i)=? and at what exact value of b is b[4]i purely real by Your method? @Gottfried What is on axis? What is k?The relation between k and x? Why there is k/64 in expression for h? ... Interesting anyway , Your pictures always seem to contain a lot of information. Ivars RE: complex iteration (complex "height") - bo198214 - 03/22/2008
Ivars Wrote:@Henryk As I am not so interested in particular values perhaps you need to stretch your own brain. The formula I used was: , . where is the attracting fixed point and is the function to be iterated. Specialized to our case using the lower fixed point we get the base by and , so: RE: complex iteration (complex "height") - bo198214 - 03/22/2008
Gottfried Wrote:[What I have are the data for the plots in Excel. Since I'm busy tomorrow (tibet-action) I'll not be able to reproduce the syntax, however I could send you the data if this helps. Everything else I can do on sat evening or sunday, let's see. I was only interested whether our results match. But one couldnt see from the graph what is, so I would be glad if you could compare this with my result of RE: complex iteration (complex "height") - Gottfried - 03/22/2008
bo198214 Wrote:I was only interested whether our results match. But one couldnt see from the graph what is, so I would be glad if you could compare this with my result of Yepp, that's exactly the value that I've got for height h=I (up to 7'th digit) In my excel-file it is real=1.2103090 imag = 0.50582757 [update] with higher precision I recomputed the value and got in the 92..96 partial-sums the following approximations: Code: `´ ` So this differs from the 7'th digit; anyway - I just computed this with the function U_t (x) = t^x - 1 T_b(x) = b^x U_t°h(x) and T_b°h(x) as their iterates of general height h and the shift T_b°h(x) = (U_t°h(x/t-1) +1)*t and the height-iteration by applying powers to the diagonal of the diagonalized operator for U_t(x) with 96 terms, using b=sqrt(2),t=2,x=1 If your values have full accuracy, then there must be a methodical difference, which I would like to find; I'll check today with other fixpoint-shifts. Gottfried RE: complex iteration (complex "height") - Gottfried - 03/22/2008
Ivars Wrote:@Gottfriedx-Axis is real, y-axis imaginary value of the result. The complex circle of radius |1| was divided in 64 steps. indicated by k as the number, so each k represents 1/64 of the circumference of the complex unit-circle. But this is only using g=1. I added the other results for equivalent parameters on the complex circles of smaller radii too. So the blue line shows the values for sqrt(2)^^(exp(2*Pi*I*k/64)), k=0..64 the green line for sqrt(2)^^(0.75*exp(2*Pi*I*k/64)), k=0..64 and so on. Here is an updated plot, where the points for h=I (the 16'th point on the blue line) , h=-1 (32'th point) , h=-I (48'th point) are marked [attachment=263] RE: complex iteration (complex "height") - Ivars - 03/22/2008
bo198214 Wrote:As I am not so interested in particular values perhaps you need to stretch your own brain. The formula I used was: My brain is already overstretched... I think I need some software that can calculate infinitely many logarithms Ivars RE: complex iteration (complex "height") - bo198214 - 03/22/2008
Ivars Wrote:My brain is already overstretched... I think I need some software that can calculate infinitely many logarithms Ya, software might be quite helpful, however no software will compute infinitely many logarithms. Its just a question of approximation. |