03/14/2011, 05:04 PM

(03/10/2011, 09:10 PM)lloyd Wrote: This has probably been thought of before, but here goes anyway. I was thinking about the "sesqui" operation intermediate between adding and multiplying; I'll write "@" here. Obviously a @ b should lie between a+b and ab. Maybe we should take the mean. But which one, arithmetic or geometric? Since one applies to addition and the other to multiplication, why not take both? Then we'll take the mean of these two. But which mean? Again, take both; the proposed value for the sesqui-operation is then the limit of this process when iterated many times.I'm very interesting about operation "@". but what's your code (pari/gp, maple...)?

In fact the two values converge quite quickly and for 10-digit precision we usually have convergence within 3 or 4 iterations. Here are some values for a @ a:

(...)

I discovered this forum after asking a question recently on sci.math. It looks like people here have been thinking about the same thing: I asked if the next operation after exponentiation should require new numbers, the way that addition/subtraction, multiplication/division, exponentiation/root-taking/logarithms lead from the counting numbers to negative, real and complex numbers respectively.