Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Discussion of TPID 6
#1
(10/07/2009, 12:03 AM)andydude Wrote: Conjecture

where such that

Discussion

To evaluate f at real numbers, an extension of tetration is required, but to evaluate f at positive integers, only real-valued exponentiation is needed. Thus the sequence given by the solutions of the equations




and so on... is the sequence under discussion. The conjecture is that the limit of this sequence is , also known as eta (). Numerical evidence indicates that this is true, as the solution for x in is approximately 1.44.

I think that the conjecture is false.
First, the numerical computation have to be carried out with much more precision.
The solution for x in is approximately 1.44467831224667 which is higher than e^(1/e)
The solution for x in is approximately 1.4446796588047 which is higher than e^(1/e)
As n increases, x increasses very slowly.
But, in any case, x is higher than e^(1/e) = 1.44466786100977

Second, on a more theoretical viewpoint, if x=e^(1/e), the limit of is e , for n tending to infinity. So, the limit isn't = n , as expected.
Reply
#2
(10/22/2010, 11:27 AM)JJacquelin Wrote: ....
As n increases, x increasses very slowly.
But, in any case, x is higher than e^(1/e) = 1.44466786100977

Second, on a more theoretical viewpoint, if x=e^(1/e), the limit of is e , for n tending to infinity. So, the limit isn't = n , as expected.
I think that's a good starting point. For x=e^(1/e), the

Another limit that I think holds is that the slog(e) gets arbitrarily large as the base approaches eta from above. Note that for these bases with B>eta, sexp(z) grows super exponentially when z gets big enough.


Now lets pick 10000. Solve for base b>eta . We know there is another number n>10000, for which , because we know that super exponential growth will eventually set in, as n grows past 10000, and that . Then, for some number n>10000, . I actually have a hunch that somewhere around n=20000 or so that superexponential growth finally kicks in.

I guess what I'm trying to get at is that we can probably prove that for , solving for b as n grows arbitrarily large, b approaches eta+. For each particular base b, there is another larger number, call it "m>n", for which Andrew's equation holds. . And that might be a pretty good step in proving Andrew's lemma.
- Sheldon
Reply
#3
(10/22/2010, 11:27 AM)JJacquelin Wrote: I think that the conjecture is false.
First, the numerical computation have to be carried out with much more precision.
The solution for x in is approximately 1.44467831224667 which is higher than e^(1/e)
The solution for x in is approximately 1.4446796588047 which is higher than e^(1/e)
As n increases, x increasses very slowly.
But, in any case, x is higher than e^(1/e) = 1.44466786100977

Second, on a more theoretical viewpoint, if x=e^(1/e), the limit of is e , for n tending to infinity. So, the limit isn't = n , as expected.
The solution for x in is approximately 1.44467831224667 -> is not correct! but yes - x=1.44467829141456

The solution for x in is approximately 1.4446796588047 -> is not correct but yes - x=1.4446679658595034

you mistake!?!! eheheh! lool

x=1.444667862058778534938

therefore, the conjecture is NOT false!

I calculated the numbers corrects by program "pari/gp". Smile
Reply
#4
Hey guys,

1. please dont post discussion in the open problems survey! Its reserved for problems exclusively.

2. The conjecture is already proven:
By me here
By tommy here.

I update the stati of the problems.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Sexp redefined ? Exp^[a]( - 00 ). + question ( TPID 19 ??) tommy1729 0 1,405 09/06/2016, 04:23 PM
Last Post: tommy1729
  Flexible etas and eulers ? TPID 10 tommy1729 0 1,279 08/19/2016, 12:09 PM
Last Post: tommy1729
  (almost) proof of TPID 13 fivexthethird 1 2,042 05/06/2016, 04:12 PM
Last Post: JmsNxn
  TPID 4 tommy1729 29 22,507 07/07/2014, 11:56 PM
Last Post: tommy1729
  introducing TPID 16 tommy1729 4 4,694 06/18/2014, 11:46 PM
Last Post: tommy1729
  Fixpoints of the dxp() - has there been discussion about it? Gottfried 0 1,973 11/10/2011, 08:29 PM
Last Post: Gottfried
  TPID 8 tommy1729 0 1,768 04/04/2011, 10:45 PM
Last Post: tommy1729
  Another proof of TPID 6 tommy1729 0 1,965 07/25/2010, 11:51 PM
Last Post: tommy1729
  proof: Limit of self-super-roots is e^1/e. TPID 6 bo198214 3 6,709 07/10/2010, 09:13 AM
Last Post: bo198214
  Tetration FAQ Discussion bo198214 27 32,775 07/17/2008, 02:52 PM
Last Post: andydude



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)