• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
 Interesting value for W, h involving phi,Omega? Ivars Long Time Fellow Posts: 366 Threads: 26 Joined: Oct 2007 01/18/2008, 12:26 PM (This post was last modified: 02/29/2008, 12:29 PM by Ivars.) Hello, I tried to find h(z) = h((I/2)^(2/I)) = h( exp(pi)/exp(-I*2*ln2) ln ( exp*pi/exp(-I*2*ln2)) = pi+ I*2*ln2 -ln(z) = - pi- I*2*ln2 so as W(-pi-I*2*ln2) = ln2 - I*(pi/2) Than h(z) = (ln2-I*(pi/2))/ (-pi - i*2*ln2) This can be braught to : h(z) = 0.5*I ( i guess with plus sign, not sure) now, since I/2 = sin (I*ln(phi)) than h((i/2)^(2/i)) = sin(I*ln(phi)) so Arcsin(h(I/2^(2/I)) = I*ln(phi) phi= -I*e^Arcsin(h(I/2)^(2/I)) so taking a self root of I/2 can be related to phi in this way. Without an additional partitioning, 2 in any side of the formula involving h(i^(1/i)), it is not possible to get from I to phi. I think it is possible to continue with I/3, I/4 etc in the same way to find interesting things. is this well known, if there is no mistake? Ivars Long Time Fellow Posts: 366 Threads: 26 Joined: Oct 2007 01/18/2008, 10:49 PM (This post was last modified: 02/28/2008, 03:07 PM by Ivars.) Next I tried to find h(z) = h((I/3)^(3/I)) = h( exp(3pi/2)/exp(-I*3*ln3)) ln ( exp(3pi/2)/exp(-I*2*ln2)) = 3pi/2+ I*3*ln3 -ln(z) = - 3pi/2- I*3*ln3 so as W(-3pi/2-I*3*ln3) = ln3 - I*(pi/2) Than h(z) = (-ln3+I*(pi/2))/ (-3pi/2 - i*3*ln3) This can be brought to : h(z) = I/3 ( i guess with plus sign, not sure) For h(i/4)^(4/i)) we have : W(-2pi-I*4*ln4) = ln4 -I*(pi/2) So most likely: W(-n*pi/2 -I*n*ln n) = ln n -n* I*(pi/2) n>1 andydude Long Time Fellow Posts: 509 Threads: 44 Joined: Aug 2007 01/19/2008, 09:16 AM Ivars Wrote:W(-pi-I*2*ln2) = ln2 - I*(pi/2) True (numerically verified). Ivars Wrote:W(-3pi/2-I*3*ln3) = ln3 - I*(pi/2) True (numerically verified). Ivars Wrote:W(-2pi-I*4*ln4) = ln4 + I*(pi/2)True (numerically verified). Ivars Wrote:H((I/2)^(I/2)^(-1)) = I/2True (numerically verified), plus this is practically the definition of H. Ivars Wrote:H((I/3)^(I/3)^(-1)) = I/3 (not numerically verified), this is practically the definition of H, so it should be true, but for some reason my CAS gives a different value. These are the values I'm getting: $ \begin{tabular}{rl} H((i/3)^{1/(i/3)}) \approx -0.008442966 & +\ 0.343894471 i \\ i/3 = 0 & +\ 0.333333333 i \end{tabular}$ although, this is bothering me, since it is the definition of H that this should be true. I'm guessing that that large value $|(i/3)^{(3/i)}|\approx 111.318$ might be why. Maybe my CAS never tested the LambertW for this large a value, and maybe it really does give the wrong value... About your claim for all n, since you have found 3 instances of it being true, it is probably true, but that does not constitute a proof. Since your logic doesn't require n to be constant, you could probably re-work the math to start with n rather than 2 or 3. Then it would be a proof. Andrew Robbins bo198214 Administrator Posts: 1,389 Threads: 90 Joined: Aug 2007 01/19/2008, 10:26 AM (This post was last modified: 01/19/2008, 10:32 AM by bo198214.) This is the result of my computation: $z=\left(\frac{i}{n}\right)^{\frac{n}{i}}=\left(\frac{i}{n}\right)^{-ni}=\frac{e^{i\frac{\pi}{2}(-ni)}}{n^{-ni}}=e^{\frac{\pi}{2}n} n^{ni}=e^{\frac{\pi}{2}n} e^{n\ln(n)i}=e^{\frac{\pi}{2}n+n\ln(n)i}$ $y:=-\ln(z)=-\frac{\pi}{2}n-n\ln(n)i$ If we now set $x:=\ln(n)-\frac{\pi}{2}i$ then $xe^x=(\ln(n)-\frac{\pi}{2}i)e^{\ln(n)-\frac{\pi}{2}i}=(\ln(n)-\frac{\pi}{2}i)n(-i)=-\ln(n)ni-\frac{\pi}{2}n=y$ And thatswhy $W(y)=x$ and $h(z)=\frac{W(y)}{y}=\frac{x}{y}$. We see above that $y=xn(-i)$ and hence $h(z)=\frac{i}{n}$. So except some minor differences (and not considering branches) this confirms your conjecture. Well done Ivars! Ivars Long Time Fellow Posts: 366 Threads: 26 Joined: Oct 2007 01/19/2008, 07:40 PM Thanks I had mistake in the sign of n=4 for I*pi/2 so correctly: W(-n*(pi/2) - I*n*ln(n) ) = ln(n) - i*pi/2 for n>=2 for n=1 the sign at i(pi/2) is +.. The resulting formula for n>=2 can also be rewritten as: W(-n*(pi/2)-I*n*ln(n))= ln(n/I) but -n(pi/2)-I*n*ln(n) =-n*ln(I)/I-I*n*ln(n)= +I*n*(ln(I)-ln(n)) So W(I*n*ln(I/n)) = ln(n/I) and W(ln((I/n)^(I*n)))=ln(n/I) which makes calculations for h simpler. It seems to hold for all x>1; at x=1 sign changes for some reason. W(ln((I/x)^(I*x)))=ln(x/I) h((I/x)^(x/I))= (I/x) Ivars Long Time Fellow Posts: 366 Threads: 26 Joined: Oct 2007 01/19/2008, 08:18 PM If we use substitution x^2=y so that x= +- sqrt(y) we can get complex conjugate values if we use both roots separately: W(-(+sqrt(y)*(pi/2) - I*(+sgrt(y)*ln(+sqrt(y)) = ln(+sqrt(y)) - i*pi/2 for y>1 but W(-(+sqrt(y)*(pi/2) - I*(-sgrt(y)*ln(+sqrt(y)) = ln(+sqrt(y)) + i*pi/2 for y>1 than the change of sign and existance of 2 values -i,+i in h(i^-i) does not cause any questions-we just use both square roots of 1, however, not symmetrically... Alternatively, we can decide to use only one value, but I^3 instead of I*(-1). W(-(+sqrt(y)*(pi/2) - I^3*(+sgrt(y)*ln(+sqrt(y)) = ln(+sqrt(y)) + i*pi/2 for y>1 So we can get both branches of W by switching from i to - i in argument of W instead of taking negative square roots. From the point of view of the result of W, these are equivalent approaches. By involving other root of y we will get h((I/x)^(x/I))= (1/I*x) Ivars bo198214 Administrator Posts: 1,389 Threads: 90 Joined: Aug 2007 01/31/2008, 11:36 PM However it seemed as if couldnt see the wood because all those trees: Of course $h(x)$ is the inverse function of $x^{1/x}$. And thatswhy it is clear that $h(x^{1/x})=x$, especially for $x=I/n$. Ivars Long Time Fellow Posts: 366 Threads: 26 Joined: Oct 2007 01/31/2008, 11:50 PM bo198214 Wrote:However it seemed as if couldnt see the wood because all those trees: Of course $h(x)$ is the inverse function of $x^{1/x}$. And thatswhy it is clear that $h(x^{1/x})=x$, especially for $x=I/n$. Also for x= I/y, y -real>1? Ivars bo198214 Administrator Posts: 1,389 Threads: 90 Joined: Aug 2007 02/01/2008, 12:08 AM Ivars Wrote:Also for x= I/y, y -real>1? I would say so. Ivars Long Time Fellow Posts: 366 Threads: 26 Joined: Oct 2007 02/01/2008, 09:53 AM (This post was last modified: 02/29/2008, 11:27 AM by Ivars.) Good. One score. Of course, it is a tetration definition, nice that it works also for I/x , but values for Lambert function of such arguments like are not so obvious (were not initially). W(-x*(pi/2) - I*x*ln(x) ) = ln(x) - I*(pi/2)=ln(x)-lnI=ln(x/I) for x>1 « Next Oldest | Next Newest »

 Possibly Related Threads... Thread Author Replies Views Last Post Interesting commutative hyperoperators ? tommy1729 0 214 02/17/2020, 11:07 PM Last Post: tommy1729 Very interesting topic Ansus 0 612 10/01/2019, 08:14 PM Last Post: Ansus Limit of mean of Iterations of f(x)=(ln(x);x>0,ln(-x) x<0) =-Omega constant for all x Ivars 10 15,723 03/29/2015, 08:02 PM Last Post: tommy1729 regular tetration base sqrt(2) : an interesting(?) constant 2.76432104 Gottfried 7 10,132 06/25/2013, 01:37 PM Last Post: sheldonison (MSE): Comparision of powertowers -.Possibly interesting thread in MSE Gottfried 0 2,065 05/22/2013, 07:02 AM Last Post: Gottfried Continuum sums -- a big problem and some interesting observations mike3 17 21,337 10/12/2010, 10:41 AM Last Post: Ansus Something interesting about Taylor series Ztolk 3 6,890 06/29/2010, 06:32 AM Last Post: bo198214 interesting pattern in hyper-operations Base-Acid Tetration 8 12,282 05/04/2009, 09:15 PM Last Post: BenStandeven Infinite tetration giving I*Omega costant=I*0.567143... Ivars 13 14,779 03/09/2008, 01:16 PM Last Post: bo198214 Observations on power series involving logarithmic singularities jaydfox 29 31,548 11/12/2007, 10:59 AM Last Post: bo198214

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)