Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
" tommy quaternion "
I have the intuition that tetration requires the introduction of numbers with real dimension (non integer, like complex or quaternion sets).

A problem is that those numbers have to include hypercomplex as a subset, but, for example a set with the dimension of a serpinsky triangle, would be a subset of the complex, and it cannot be closed under addition/multiplication, without including all of the complex numbers, but then it would just be equal to the complex.

So, closure has to be abandoned, or the set has to be a set of sets with all the possible dimensions.

Also, sometimes tetration leads to step functions or dirac delta functions. A diract delta is similar to a segment of line with unit length. It is one dimensional, meanwhile an hypercomplex number is a point, which is zero-dimensional.

It is analogous to surreal numbers, where a segment of line would be like a number infinitely larger than a point.

So maybe the serpinsky triangle should be taken as something in between a point and a surface, instead of a subset of the complex.

Instead of thinking of numbers as points, we should think of then as fractal sets.

An exponentiation to a real exponent, in general, has infinite solutions (because a root has infinite solutions in the complex field). Those infinite solutions are a set.

Probably we should think of tetration as operations between sets instead of between numbers. Probably fractal sets.

Possibly singularities in functions are just numbers with a different dimension. A pole in a complex function may be a line number with length equal to the pole's residue.

Possibly Taylor series require numbers with a different dimension outside of his radius of convergence, to be able to calculate pass singularities.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
For the " tommy octonion " we have the following Jacobi matrix.
By that I mean the Jacobi matrix for taking f(X) = X^2 in that number system.

see pictures.

The inverse of that matrix corresponds to taking the square root whenever the matrix is invertible (the determinant of the original Jacobi is not zero).
( see : )


Tom Marcel Raes

Attached Files Image(s)
Off topic but I like that you use a day planner/agenda to write your math in, lol.

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  tommy's simple solution ln^[n](2sinh^[n+x](z)) tommy1729 1 4,028 01/17/2017, 07:21 AM
Last Post: sheldonison
  Tommy's matrix method for superlogarithm. tommy1729 0 2,624 05/07/2016, 12:28 PM
Last Post: tommy1729
  Dangerous limits ... Tommy's limit paradox tommy1729 0 2,830 11/27/2015, 12:36 AM
Last Post: tommy1729
  Tommy's Gamma trick ? tommy1729 7 9,975 11/07/2015, 01:02 PM
Last Post: tommy1729
  Tommy triangles tommy1729 1 3,218 11/04/2015, 01:17 PM
Last Post: tommy1729
  Tommy-Gottfried divisions. tommy1729 0 2,478 10/09/2015, 07:39 AM
Last Post: tommy1729
  Tommy's hyperlog tommy1729 0 2,596 06/11/2015, 08:23 AM
Last Post: tommy1729
Sad Tommy-Mandelbrot function tommy1729 0 2,935 04/21/2015, 01:02 PM
Last Post: tommy1729
  tommy equation tommy1729 3 6,001 03/18/2015, 08:52 AM
Last Post: sheldonison
  Kouznetsov-Tommy-Cauchy method tommy1729 0 2,942 02/18/2015, 07:05 PM
Last Post: tommy1729

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)