• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
 half-iterates of x^2-x+1 Balarka Sen Junior Fellow Posts: 25 Threads: 7 Joined: Feb 2013 03/22/2013, 08:19 PM What is the analytic solution to f(f(x))=x^2-x+1? I am thinking about Ecalle's method . . . I don't think transforming this into Abel's equation would be of any use since it's mostly applicable where f has a attractive fixed points and transforming it into Schroeder's form and solving it by following Koening's line for 0 < |f'(z)| < 1. But x^2 - x + 1 has only one fixed point which is neutral. I think Taylor series maybe used since 1 is probably a fixed point of f but it doesn't seems like it would converge, would it? Can we analytically continue the taylor series then? Balarka . sheldonison Long Time Fellow Posts: 641 Threads: 22 Joined: Oct 2008 03/22/2013, 09:30 PM (This post was last modified: 03/22/2013, 11:18 PM by sheldonison.) (03/22/2013, 08:19 PM)Balarka Sen Wrote: What is the analytic solution to f(f(x))=x^2-x+1? I am thinking about Ecalle's method . . . .... But x^2 - x + 1 has only one fixed point which is neutral. I think Taylor series maybe used since 1 is probably a fixed point of f but it doesn't seems like it would converge, would it?You are correct. If you develop the half iterate of a function at the parabolic fixed point, then it is a divergent series. see Will Jagy's comments at http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/...ate-of-x2c. Your question is equivalent to f(f(x))=x^2+x, where now the parabolic fixed point is zero. For your case, $y^2-y+1$, the equivalent parabolic fixed point is 1 where y=x+1. Then there is a formal abel function solution given by Ecalle for $g(x)=x^2+x$. This abel function is actually a formally divergent series, but in practice it works quite well, especially for smaller values x, as x approaches zero, by simply iterating $g^{-1}(x)$ a few times before using the abel function, or if approaching from the negative reals, iterating g(z) a few times and also using the log(-x) in the abel function. $\alpha(g(x))=\alpha(x)+1$ $\alpha(x) = \log(x)+ \frac{-1}{x} + \frac{-x}{2}+ \frac{x^2}{3}+ \frac{-13x^3}{36}+ \frac{113x^4}{240}+ \frac{-1187x^5}{1800}+ \frac{877x^6}{945}+ \frac{-14569x^7}{11760}+ \frac{176017x^8}{120960}+ \frac{-1745717x^9}{1360800}+ \frac{88217x^{10}}{259875}+$ $ \frac{147635381x^{11}}{109771200}+ \frac{-3238110769x^{12}}{1556755200}+ \frac{-63045343657x^{13}}{23610787200}+ \frac{24855467017x^{14}}{1489863375}+ \frac{-20362710600601x^{15}}{817296480000}+ \frac{-13053665468881x^{16}}{380007936000}+ ...$ and then the half iterate is $f(x)=\alpha^{-1}(\alpha(x)+\frac{1}{2})$, and y=x+1 gets you back to your original equation. Since the abel function is a divergent series at x=0, then the half iterate would also be a divergent series at x=0. The half iterate generated at any center point other than zero would be a normal convergent analytic function. This is because there are really two different leau fatou flower petals with two different abel functions, one generated from x>0 fixed point (repelling), and one generated from x<0 (attracting), and you can't analytically continue from one to the other. For example, I generated the half iterate of 0.5i, from both flower petals. In one case, I iterated g(z) 40 times, to get an accurate abel function result. Then I added a half, and took the inverse abel function, and then iterated $g^{-1}$ 40 times to get the half iterate of 0.5i $\approx -0.1113+0.5335i$. In the other case, I did the reverse, starting with 0.5i, and iterating $g^{-1}$ 40 times, then I took the half iterate, and then I iterated g(z) 40 times to get a half iterate of 0.5i $\approx-0.1138+0.5246i$. The two results differed by nearly 0.01i. Had I started with 0.2i, the two results would be consistent to 4E-12. So, the half iterate centered at zero acts like an analytic function as long as z is close to zero, but as imag(z) gets bigger, the half iterate has two possible values that are increasingly different. You have to pick which leau flower petal you're interested in to get arbitrarily exact results. Hope that helps. - Sheldon tommy1729 Ultimate Fellow Posts: 1,372 Threads: 336 Joined: Feb 2009 04/30/2013, 01:14 AM @Balarka I posted a method for half-iterates today. If you want to avoid matrices , fixpoints , abel- or super functions that might intrest you. regards tommy1729 "Truth is that what does not go away when you stop believing in it" tommy1729 « Next Oldest | Next Newest »

 Possibly Related Threads... Thread Author Replies Views Last Post Merged fixpoints of 2 iterates ? Asymptotic ? [2019] tommy1729 1 1,287 09/10/2019, 11:28 AM Last Post: sheldonison Half-iterates and periodic stuff , my mod method [2019] tommy1729 0 823 09/09/2019, 10:55 PM Last Post: tommy1729 Approximation to half-iterate by high indexed natural iterates (base on ShlThrb) Gottfried 1 1,206 09/09/2019, 10:50 PM Last Post: tommy1729 Does tetration take the right half plane to itself? JmsNxn 7 8,096 05/16/2017, 08:46 PM Last Post: JmsNxn Half-iteration of x^(n^2) + 1 tommy1729 3 5,148 03/09/2017, 10:02 PM Last Post: Xorter Uniqueness of half-iterate of exp(x) ? tommy1729 14 18,693 01/09/2017, 02:41 AM Last Post: Gottfried [AIS] (alternating) Iteration series: Half-iterate using the AIS? Gottfried 33 46,610 03/27/2015, 11:28 PM Last Post: tommy1729 [entire exp^0.5] The half logaritm. tommy1729 1 2,947 05/11/2014, 06:10 PM Last Post: tommy1729 Does the Mellin transform have a half-iterate ? tommy1729 4 4,755 05/07/2014, 11:52 PM Last Post: tommy1729 Simple method for half iterate NOT based on a fixpoint. tommy1729 2 4,066 04/30/2013, 09:33 PM Last Post: tommy1729

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)