Some slog stuff sheldonison Long Time Fellow Posts: 684 Threads: 24 Joined: Oct 2008 05/14/2015, 03:13 PM (05/14/2015, 02:28 PM)tommy1729 Wrote: ... Unless the functional equations no longer hold there.Consider that slog(0)=-1, slog(1)=0 given the 2pi i periodicity, then slog(2pi i)=-1; slog(1+2pi i)=0 slog(2npi i)=-1; slog(1+2npi i)=0 for any value of n sexp is the inverse of slog. Therefore, somewhere on the sexp(z) Riemann surface, as you circle around the singularity at -2: sexp(-1)=0; sexp(0)=1 sexp(-1)=2pi i; sexp(0)=1+2pi i sexp(-1)=2npi i; sexp(0)=1+2npi i for any value of n - Sheldon tommy1729 Ultimate Fellow Posts: 1,852 Threads: 399 Joined: Feb 2009 05/14/2015, 05:58 PM (05/14/2015, 03:13 PM)sheldonison Wrote: (05/14/2015, 02:28 PM)tommy1729 Wrote: ... Unless the functional equations no longer hold there.Consider that slog(0)=-1, slog(1)=0 given the 2pi i periodicity, then slog(2pi i)=-1; slog(1+2pi i)=0 slog(2npi i)=-1; slog(1+2npi i)=0 for any value of n sexp is the inverse of slog. Therefore, somewhere on the sexp(z) Riemann surface, as you circle around the singularity at -2: sexp(-1)=0; sexp(0)=1 sexp(-1)=2pi i; sexp(0)=1+2pi i sexp(-1)=2npi i; sexp(0)=1+2npi i for any value of n Well approximately yes. Analytic continuation forces perfect periodicity to extend everywhere. You might like my next post. Regards Tommy1729 ITS hard to convince a smart person but iTS near impossible to convince an idiot. tommy1729 Ultimate Fellow Posts: 1,852 Threads: 399 Joined: Feb 2009 05/14/2015, 06:55 PM Im reminded of my old tommy's tetration constant. TT constant for short or now maybe Tommy-Sheldon base constant. Anyway the issue is that to make the periodicity stronger we make sure the fixpoint and period work together. Thus im(fix) = im(period) Exp(a z) = z Im(z) = 2 pi / a Then slog base exp(a) has all its singularities lined up with the desired asymptotic period. Isn't that Nice ? I think i talked about closed forms for a and exp(a) but I do not remember the results if any. I think it was not here. A closed form would be appreciated. Lambert-W ? Contour integral representation ? Nice taylor series ? Tommy-kouznetsov expansion ?? Btw I wonder how many constants are defined in this forum/tetrarion. Regards Tommy1729 sheldonison Long Time Fellow Posts: 684 Threads: 24 Joined: Oct 2008 05/14/2015, 08:06 PM (05/14/2015, 05:58 PM)tommy1729 Wrote: (05/14/2015, 03:13 PM)sheldonison Wrote: (05/14/2015, 02:28 PM)tommy1729 Wrote: ... Unless the functional equations no longer hold there.Consider that slog(0)=-1, slog(1)=0 given the 2pi i periodicity, then slog(2pi i)=-1; slog(1+2pi i)=0 slog(2npi i)=-1; slog(1+2npi i)=0 for any value of n sexp is the inverse of slog. Therefore, somewhere on the sexp(z) Riemann surface, as you circle around the singularity at -2: sexp(-1)=0; sexp(0)=1 sexp(-1)=2pi i; sexp(0)=1+2pi i sexp(-1)=2npi i; sexp(0)=1+2npi i for any value of n Well approximately yes. Analytic continuation forces perfect periodicity to extend everywhere. Everywhere until you hit the singularity. The singularity is at L,L*. To the left of those singularities, slog(z) is both analytic and exactly 2pi i periodic. To the right, slog is no longer 2pi i periodic. A similar 2pi i periodic would be $\sqrt{1-\exp(z)}\;$; it is exactly 2pi i periodic in the left half of the complex plane, but not the right half. - Sheldon tommy1729 Ultimate Fellow Posts: 1,852 Threads: 399 Joined: Feb 2009 05/14/2015, 08:58 PM That is not consistent with the many singularities ... Unless you take your slog branches different ?! If you take your branches perpendicular to the real axis instead of parallel. However , are we really Free to choose our branch cuts ? Afterall we need the equality exp^[1/2](z) = sexp(slog(z)+1/2) to hold. Regards Tommy1729 tommy1729 Ultimate Fellow Posts: 1,852 Threads: 399 Joined: Feb 2009 05/14/2015, 09:25 PM Are you saying half-exp is periodic on the left ? Hmm in that case there is hope for the modified 3rd question. Need to think. What about this Tommy-Sheldon constant ? Regards Tommy1729 Ps what you say about sexp is correct. PPS : why dont we have a singularity at ln(L+2 pi i) ? Does this imply that ln(L+2 pi i) is not in the range of sexp ? I think so ! « Next Oldest | Next Newest »

 Possibly Related Threads… Thread Author Replies Views Last Post [NT] Caleb stuff , mick's MSE and tommy's diary functions tommy1729 0 55 02/26/2023, 08:37 PM Last Post: tommy1729 [NT] more zeta stuff for the fans tommy1729 11 262 02/23/2023, 12:59 PM Last Post: tommy1729 E^^.5 and Slog(e,.5) Catullus 7 1,090 07/22/2022, 02:20 AM Last Post: MphLee Slog(Exponential Factorial(x)) Catullus 19 2,996 07/13/2022, 02:38 AM Last Post: Catullus Slog(x^^^2) Catullus 1 478 07/10/2022, 04:40 AM Last Post: JmsNxn Slog(e4) Catullus 0 454 06/16/2022, 03:27 AM Last Post: Catullus A support for Andy's (P.Walker's) slog-matrix-method Gottfried 4 6,437 03/08/2021, 07:13 PM Last Post: JmsNxn Half-iterates and periodic stuff , my mod method [2019] tommy1729 0 2,835 09/09/2019, 10:55 PM Last Post: tommy1729 A limit exercise with Ei and slog. tommy1729 0 4,028 09/09/2014, 08:00 PM Last Post: tommy1729 A system of functional equations for slog(x) ? tommy1729 3 9,489 07/28/2014, 09:16 PM Last Post: tommy1729

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)