Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Taylor series of upx function
#11
sheldonison Wrote:What does this equation mean?
The asterisc * means the complex conjugation. You can evaluate function at the complex–conjugated argument, and the result is the conjugated value of the function. In particular, for real values of the argument, the function is real.

sheldonison Wrote:I was expecting more along the lines of
upx(x+1) = exp ( upx(x) )
??
These are not just lines, this is all the range of complex values of x, except part of the real axis .

sheldonison Wrote:The next line is also intriguing....

Does this mean that other holomorphic solutions exist, but they all must have a negative derivative at some point x>-2?
No, but condition that the derivative is positive simplifies my proof of the uniqueness. Recently, Henryk Trappmann suggested the proof through the inverse function; it does not use the requirement that, at the real argument, the derivative is positive. I see no errors in his proof.
So, we may remove this claim about the first derivative.

sheldonison Wrote:I started working on the algebra to generate the general equations for all 5th and 6th order upx approximations that have smooth 1st, 2nd, and 3rd derivatives, but not necessarily smooth 4th and 5th derivatives. You would claim that all members of that set, if extended with higher order coefficients so that all derivatives would be smooth, would have a negative 1st derivative somewhere?
Your question is not clear.
Instead of "somewhere" you could say "at some real value of the argument, larger, than ".
Then the answer is "not".
You may consider the function
at small real values of parameter , id est, .
Smoothness of all the derivatives at the real axis is not sufficient for the uniqueness. We have to claim the holomorphism at least for the domain with real part of the argument larger than .
I have pictures for the singular solutions too.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Taylor series of upx function - by Zagreus - 09/07/2008, 10:56 AM
RE: Taylor series of upx function - by bo198214 - 09/10/2008, 01:56 PM
RE: Taylor series of upx function - by andydude - 10/23/2008, 10:16 PM
RE: Taylor series of upx function - by Kouznetsov - 11/16/2008, 01:40 PM
RE: Taylor series of upx function - by bo198214 - 11/16/2008, 07:17 PM
RE: Taylor series of upx function - by Kouznetsov - 11/17/2008, 04:11 AM
RE: Taylor series of upx function - by bo198214 - 11/18/2008, 11:49 AM
RE: Taylor series of upx function - by Kouznetsov - 12/02/2008, 12:03 PM
RE: Taylor series of upx function - by Kouznetsov - 12/05/2008, 12:30 AM

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Perhaps a new series for log^0.5(x) Gottfried 3 1,371 03/21/2020, 08:28 AM
Last Post: Daniel
  New mathematical object - hyperanalytic function arybnikov 4 1,880 01/02/2020, 01:38 AM
Last Post: arybnikov
  Is there a function space for tetration? Chenjesu 0 888 06/23/2019, 08:24 PM
Last Post: Chenjesu
  Degamma function Xorter 0 1,327 10/22/2018, 11:29 AM
Last Post: Xorter
Question Taylor series of i[x] Xorter 12 14,988 02/20/2018, 09:55 PM
Last Post: Xorter
  An explicit series for the tetration of a complex height Vladimir Reshetnikov 13 15,416 01/14/2017, 09:09 PM
Last Post: Vladimir Reshetnikov
  Complaining about MSE ; attitude against tetration and iteration series ! tommy1729 0 2,038 12/26/2016, 03:01 AM
Last Post: tommy1729
  2 fixpoints , 1 period --> method of iteration series tommy1729 0 2,084 12/21/2016, 01:27 PM
Last Post: tommy1729
  Taylor series of cheta Xorter 13 16,247 08/28/2016, 08:52 PM
Last Post: sheldonison
  Taylor polynomial. System of equations for the coefficients. marraco 17 20,041 08/23/2016, 11:25 AM
Last Post: Gottfried



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)