Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Generalized Gaussian Method (GGM)
#1
The Gaussian method can be easily generalized.

suppose we use f(s) = exp( g(s) f(s-1) ) , then we are bounded in the sense that g(s) cannot grow to fast towards 1 as Re(s) goes to +oo.
The reason is, if g(s) grows like O(exp(-exp(s)) ) then the (complex) argument (theta) gives us trouble. With erf(s) we are close to 1 + exp(-s^2) and because s^2 puts the imaginary line at 45° that is ok.

With 1 + exp(-exp(s)) however the complex argument (theta) gives us issues. 1 + exp(-exp(s)) goes to 1 fast for positive real s , BUT because of the complex argument ( theta ) this does not hold for non-real s even if their real parts are large.

So we look for functions g(s) between 1 + exp(-s^2) and 1 + exp(-exp(s)).
This is cruxial to understand !

So how do we do that ?

For starters it is also known that functions below O(exp(s)) can be completely defined by the value at 0 and its zero's.

And we want the zero's to be close to the imag axis.

This results in my generalized gaussian method.

see pictures !!

Regards

Tom Marcel Raes

tommy1729


Attached Files Image(s)
       
Reply
#2
The related integral above is quite complicated.
So I came up with the following simplification.

A different method but very similar.

n are integers larger than 0.
m is going to +infinity.











This has similar properties as the other generalized gaussian method and it should be easier to implement.

call it GGM2 or so.

For bases other than e ; take the base e^b then we get 











regards

tommy1729
Tom Marcel Raes
Reply
#3
(10/26/2021, 10:41 PM)tommy1729 Wrote: The related integral above is quite complicated.
So I came up with the following simplification.

A different method but very similar.

n are integers larger than 0.
m is going to +infinity.











This has similar properties as the other generalized gaussian method and it should be easier to implement.

call it GGM2 or so.

For bases other than e ; take the base e^b then we get 











regards

tommy1729
Tom Marcel Raes

A further idea is to generalize like this 
 for positive odd w ; 



for instance w = 3 or w = 7.

with w = 7 we get the case :

n are integers larger than 0.
m is going to +infinity.











This has similar properties as the other generalized gaussian method and it should be easier to implement.

call it GGM2 or so.

For bases other than e ; take the base e^b then we get 











Notice this latest new modifation does not change the range where we get close to 1 much , but is still getting faster to 1.


regards

tommy1729
Tom Marcel Raes

ps : join " tetration friends " at facebook :p
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Tommy's Gaussian method. tommy1729 24 3,719 11/11/2021, 12:58 AM
Last Post: JmsNxn
  Arguments for the beta method not being Kneser's method JmsNxn 54 6,109 10/23/2021, 03:13 AM
Last Post: sheldonison
  Some "Theorem" on the generalized superfunction Leo.W 44 9,189 09/24/2021, 04:37 PM
Last Post: Leo.W
  tommy's singularity theorem and connection to kneser and gaussian method tommy1729 2 453 09/20/2021, 04:29 AM
Last Post: JmsNxn
  Why the beta-method is non-zero in the upper half plane JmsNxn 0 314 09/01/2021, 01:57 AM
Last Post: JmsNxn
  Improved infinite composition method tommy1729 5 1,222 07/10/2021, 04:07 AM
Last Post: JmsNxn
  Generalized Kneser superfunction trick (the iterated limit definition) MphLee 25 8,085 05/26/2021, 11:55 PM
Last Post: MphLee
  A different approach to the base-change method JmsNxn 0 711 03/17/2021, 11:15 PM
Last Post: JmsNxn
  A support for Andy's (P.Walker's) slog-matrix-method Gottfried 4 4,770 03/08/2021, 07:13 PM
Last Post: JmsNxn
  Doubts on the domains of Nixon's method. MphLee 1 1,000 03/02/2021, 10:43 PM
Last Post: JmsNxn



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)