12/01/2015, 02:58 PM
(This post was last modified: 12/01/2015, 03:35 PM by sheldonison.)

(12/01/2015, 01:22 PM)tommy1729 Wrote: Im not angry but I cant agree with this without seeing a proof or the words conjecture.

Im not sure how post 61 relates.

Bottomline is every statement should be followed by the words proof or conjecture.

Nowhere analytic is a big claim.

And besides technically you compute things differently .. Although it might be equivalent (or locally equivalent).

Therefore i posted my way of computing again.

It was the sequence leading up to your post#68 (not #61 sorry), "I think the same applies to the base change ... I do not immediately know a way around it." I like my post#65, showing how the Taylor series abruptly changes again somewhere near the somewhere around the 1,352,620th taylor series term. As far as proving the conjecture that the basechange sexp or the TommySexp, or tommy's half exp are nowhere analytic... nope, that hasn't happened. Perhaps someone with a real mathematics education, who is more brilliant than you or I can step in. In the mean time, the calculations I have done, along with posts by Henryk, and Mike are all in agreement.

For now I am done with this conversation. Attempts at proving a non-zero radius of convergence for all counter examples have failed so far, and I don't see anything new. Nor do we have a discussion of how one might proceed on a mathematically rigorous proof. So I see little chance of learning anything useful, or having a productive exchange. So I'm done for now, and I am unlikely to post anything further. Have a good day.

- Sheldon