• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
 hyper 0 dantheman163 Junior Fellow Posts: 13 Threads: 3 Joined: Oct 2009 10/25/2009, 11:29 PM I have a couple of ideas about the hyper 0 operator. I have see a couple of different definitions of it that don't agree with each other and nobody seems to have a definite solution. Some people say that a[0]b= b+1. Others have sort of a piece wise approach that is discontinuous and frankly doesn't make much sense. I have found a different approach (that may be completely wrong). The solution that i have found is that a[0]b= (a+b)/a + a The initial conditions that i worked with were as follows: 1. a[0]a=a+2 2. 2[0]4=5 (2[x]4 = 2[x+1]3) 3. This operation should be something that is fundamental (this is not really an initial condition but rather something i figured to be true) Now what is operation really means is something that may not be inherently obvious from the the definition a[0]b= (a+b)/a + a. I am going to explain using fingers. To start you would put a fingers in one hand and b fingers in the other. Next you would figure out how many groups of a fingers you had total. Then you would perform the sum (# of groups) + (# in each group ) which is the same as (# of groups) + a. For example 3[0]3 You have 6 fingers total. So you have 2 groups of 3 fingers. So the answer is 2+3 = 5 3[0]2 You have 5 fingers total.That is 1 and 2/3s groups of 3. So the answer is 5/3+3 = 14/3 An error that some people may see is that a[0](a[0]a) DOES NOT= a+3 however, I feel that a[0]a[0]a = a+3. a[0]b[0]c using "the finger method" would equal (a+b+c)/a + a. I hope that you guys will not have to struggle too hard to understand what I am saying and I also hope that all of this is not completely wrong Thanks. andydude Long Time Fellow Posts: 509 Threads: 44 Joined: Aug 2007 10/26/2009, 01:43 AM I see another error. I have 10 fingers, not 6. MphLee Fellow Posts: 184 Threads: 19 Joined: May 2013 03/09/2021, 10:28 PM Ok, at the beginning I was convinced that the grouping operation on fingers was just the arithmetic mean. Quote:To start you would put a fingers in one hand and b fingers in the other. Next you would figure out how many groups of a fingers you had total. Then you would perform the sum (# of groups) + (# in each group ) which is the same as (# of groups) + a. In that interpretation we have that given a sequence $a_i\in\mathbb C$ for $i\in I$, we can see this sequence as $|I|$ group of fingers where every group $i\in I$ has $a_i$ fingers in it. So we define an "hyper 0" operator $\underset{i\in I}{\rm O}$ $\underset{i\in I}{\rm O}a_i=\frac{\sum_{i\in I}a_i}{|I|}+|I|$ if $\forall i,j\in I: a_i=a_j$ then  $\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{\rm O}}a=a+n$ for $|I|=2$ (the 2-ary version) we get $a_1{\rm O}a_2=\frac{a_1+a_2}{2}+2$   and   $a{\rm O}a=a+2$ But then an example of computation proposed is Quote:3[0]2 You have 5 fingers total.That is 1 and 2/3s groups of 3. So the answer is 5/3+3 = 14/3 So the groups are meant to be weighted and the operation is clearly not commutative anymore. In fact the operation proposed is the following. Let $a_i\in\mathbb C$ for $I=\{1,2,3,..., n\}$. Define $\lambda_i:=a_i/a_1$ $\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{\rm O}}a_i:=a_1+\sum_{i=1}^n\lambda_i$ if $1\leq\forall i,j\leq n: a_i=a_j$ then  $\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{\rm O}}a=a+\sum_{i=1}^n1=a+n$ for $n=2$,  $a_1=a\neq 0$ and $a_2=b$ $a{\rm O}b=a+(1+\frac{b}{a})$   and   $a{\rm O}a=a+2$ It is clear that the solutions work in some way for preaddition. It is not clear to me how these two solutions can meet the requirment of fundamentality Quote:3. This operation should be something that is fundamental since they require summation and ratios to be defined. MathStackExchange account:MphLee Fundamental Law $(\sigma+1)0=\sigma (\sigma+1)$ « Next Oldest | Next Newest »

 Possibly Related Threads... Thread Author Replies Views Last Post On my old fractional calculus approach to hyper-operations JmsNxn 14 3,274 07/07/2021, 07:35 AM Last Post: JmsNxn On to C^\infty--and attempts at C^\infty hyper-operations JmsNxn 11 3,820 03/02/2021, 09:55 PM Last Post: JmsNxn Thoughts on hyper-operations of rational but non-integer orders? VSO 2 3,738 09/09/2019, 10:38 PM Last Post: tommy1729 Hyper-volume by integration Xorter 0 2,987 04/08/2017, 01:52 PM Last Post: Xorter Hyper operators in computability theory JmsNxn 5 9,561 02/15/2017, 10:07 PM Last Post: MphLee Recursive formula generating bounded hyper-operators JmsNxn 0 3,239 01/17/2017, 05:10 AM Last Post: JmsNxn holomorphic binary operators over naturals; generalized hyper operators JmsNxn 15 28,294 08/22/2016, 12:19 AM Last Post: JmsNxn on constructing hyper operations for bases > eta JmsNxn 1 5,165 04/08/2015, 09:18 PM Last Post: marraco Bounded Analytic Hyper operators JmsNxn 25 39,071 04/01/2015, 06:09 PM Last Post: MphLee Incredible reduction for Hyper operators JmsNxn 0 3,898 02/13/2014, 06:20 PM Last Post: JmsNxn

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)