Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
On to C^\infty--and attempts at C^\infty hyper-operations
#7
(02/21/2021, 01:38 AM)sheldonison Wrote:
(02/16/2021, 08:40 AM)JmsNxn Wrote: So I posted a proof of before I started working today...

I am in the process of rewriting my entire paper to focus on hyper-operations; whereby it's a long proof by induction. But the initial step is to prove that this tetration is . Now I can most definitely show this tetration is ; the trouble I'm having is making the proof as general as possible; so that we can create a proof by induction showing is .

Hi James,  
I like your paper.  I would suggest generating an infinite sequence of entire functions, perhaps defined as follows; this is slightly modified from your approach where this = JmsNxn phi(s+1)
we could start with 

this  asymptotically approaches exp(s) as gets arbitrarily negative, 
  also asymptotically approaches exp(s) as gets arbitrarily negative

James has proven that is entire, and I think each of these phi functions is also entire, and each  would probably lead to an  function which is also only defined at the real axis; details tbd...

probably grows more like pentation.
Notice the similarity to the superfunctions of the previous function in the list.

So that would probably fail to get another c^oo solution to tetration but rather a c^oo solution to pentation or higher.
Unfortunately probably not analytic either.

Generalizing to fractional index n is then probably similar to the classic ' semi-super ' function type questions.

So sorry but .. I am not convinced of its usefullness.

***

**could** however converge to f(s) = s + 1 ( the successor function !) for appropriately defined f_1(s).

Maybe that could be usefull for some kind of hyperoperator ?
However going to negative index n does not seem to give interesting results ( only linear functions ?).

Ofcourse many variants of the above can be considered and the question is very vague and open.
But it is not certain in what direction we should proceed .. or is it ??

It does not seem simpler than generalizing ackermann , making ackermann analytic etc 

Regards

tommy1729
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: On to C^\infty--and attempts at C^\infty hyper-operations - by tommy1729 - 02/27/2021, 12:08 AM

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  On my old fractional calculus approach to hyper-operations JmsNxn 14 3,260 07/07/2021, 07:35 AM
Last Post: JmsNxn
  hyper 0 dantheman163 2 5,306 03/09/2021, 10:28 PM
Last Post: MphLee
  Thoughts on hyper-operations of rational but non-integer orders? VSO 2 3,721 09/09/2019, 10:38 PM
Last Post: tommy1729
  Could there be an "arctic geometry" by raising the rank of all operations? Syzithryx 2 4,127 07/24/2019, 05:59 PM
Last Post: Syzithryx
  Hyper-volume by integration Xorter 0 2,982 04/08/2017, 01:52 PM
Last Post: Xorter
  Hyper operators in computability theory JmsNxn 5 9,554 02/15/2017, 10:07 PM
Last Post: MphLee
  Recursive formula generating bounded hyper-operators JmsNxn 0 3,235 01/17/2017, 05:10 AM
Last Post: JmsNxn
  holomorphic binary operators over naturals; generalized hyper operators JmsNxn 15 28,264 08/22/2016, 12:19 AM
Last Post: JmsNxn
  Intresting ternary operations ? tommy1729 0 3,061 06/11/2015, 08:18 AM
Last Post: tommy1729
  on constructing hyper operations for bases > eta JmsNxn 1 5,156 04/08/2015, 09:18 PM
Last Post: marraco



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)