• 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
 Universal uniqueness criterion? Gottfried Ultimate Fellow Posts: 789 Threads: 121 Joined: Aug 2007 06/25/2008, 06:15 AM Perhaps the following two msgs in sci.math of David Libert are appropriately posted to this thread. I just copy&paste the whole msg to provide the context. Perhaps we move this post to another place - Henryk? Code:(David Libert ah170@FreeNet.Carleton.CA ) Rotwang (sg552@hotmail.co.uk) writes: > > On 19 Jun, 04:07, Rotwang wrote:   [deletions...] >> >> Based on the recent discussions it seems that there is no known way to >> >> define non-integer iteration in general, but I was wondering whether >> >> anybody here knows whether it can always be defined in the restricted >> >> setting given here, or alternatively whether there are any no-go >> >> theorems which show that it can't. >> >> >> >> Of particular interest is the case where f (z) = exp (z), for z in {z >> >> in C | 0 <= im z < 2 pi} since this is an important transformation in >> >> the book I'm reading. In this case f^t (z) would be a generalisation >> >> of tetration to non-integer height... > > > > Sorry, this is wrong. I mean a generalisation of iterated > > exponentiation to non-integer height. Does anybody know if such a > > thing exists?   This question came up here and in other recent threads.  I have not read all of the large volume of writing about this in all threads, so I may have overlooked something, but from what I have so far seen this has not yet been answered.   I don't know the answer either, nor have I found one on the Internet. I will note some things related to the question, some I think I have proven myself, others found.   First, I Googled on  fractional iteration  and it does seem to be a big topic. Tommy in other threads has written about tetration as related to this.  I have previously heard of tetration in making higer iterations of exponentiation possibibly into the transfinite, along the lines of ordinat notation generalizations of Ackermann's function.  But that Google search did show that this word is also applied to fractional and continuous interpolations.   I will note some specific interesting looking leads from that search: a sci.math.research thread from 2005   fractional iteration of functions http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math.research/browse_thread/thread/b7f7ebcdc67d6bce the FOM thread  Fractional Iteration and Rates of Growth     near the top of http://www.cs.nyu.edu/pipermail/fom/2006-May/thread.html#start and:    http://www.tetration.org/Dynamics/   What I seem to be seeing above and these various threads is it often possible to define various continuous interpolations but it is hard to say which if any are canoical. Rotwang above proposed more stringent requirement on a solution, but that leaves open the question of existence.  If that were solved there is also the question of uniqueness.   A similar point, concerning another case with a more known solution, as I understand it there are many interpolations of the integer factorial function to the complex numbers, but if we require log-convexity we have unique existence with the Gamma function.   I will add some related results I may have proven.  I don't want to take the time here to write out proofs.  Maybe it would be safer to call these conjectures  :-) .   So I think ZF proves that if A is an infinite set which can be well-ordered and f: A >->> A   is an injection,   then there are  2^A  many   g: A >->> A   with f = g o g  .   (That is function compoistion).   ZF proves for A infinite well-orderable there are  2^A many functions : A -> A, so this would be as many possible.   Regarding   f: R -> R   (R the reals),  if  f is  non-decreasing (this is:   x  f(x) <= f(y) )   and continuous then there are #R many  non-decreasing and continous  g : R -> R with   f = g o g .   By smooth I mean all finite iterated derivatives exist everywhere and are continous.   For  f : R -> R   non-decreasing and smooth  there are  #R many g  non-decreasing and smooth with  f = g o g.   On the other hand  if  f : R -> R  is non-increasing,  then there are no non-decreasing g : R -> R  with  f = g o g,   and there are no non-increasing g : R -> R  with f = g o g .   But if  f : R -> R  is continous and non-increasing,  there are #R many  g : R -> R which are piecewise continous on countably many half-open intervals with  f = g o g .   It seems a mess to try anything for f non-increasing.   For f non-decreasing, you can keep repeating the .5 construction of new g's above.  You can define dyadic rational exponentiation on these, by using the contruction to take .5 's and ordinary integer powers to take multiples.  The right things commute for this to be well-defined.   The ordering relations among these are as expected and monotonic, so by taking appropriate sups or infs of dyadic rational exponents you can extend this to real exponents of iteration.   Unfortunately, if f started as continuous or smooth, you have each of the slices is respectivelty continous or smooth, but overall operation considered over variable exponent need not be continuous or smooth in that exponent variable.  Because each time you halved the exponent you made a non-canonical choice of how to do so, and could have taken wildly different functions.   Indeed none of the functions produced in any of these claims are canonical.  The internal proofs made arbitrary choices along the way, that is why they produced many functions instead of one. and a correction, posted later on the day Code:David Libert (ah170@FreeNet.Carleton.CA) writes:   [deletions...] > >   So I think ZF proves that if A is an infinite set which can be well-ordered and > > f: A >->> A   is an injection,   then there are  2^A  many   g: A >->> A   with > > f = g o g  .   (That is function compoistion).   I will revise the above, after reconsidering the proof more carefully.  For A as above and    f : A >->> A   as above,  I will define a 2-cycle to be a sibset  {x, y} of A such that    x ~= y   and    f(x) = y     and     f(y) = x .   The first revision will be if the number of 2-cycles is finite and odd,  then there are no   g   as above such that    f =  g o g.   So regarding the remaining cases  (finite and even # of 2-cycles  or  infinitely many 2-cycles) :   Let  B  =  {x in A |   f(x)  ~= x} .   If B is uncountable then there  are  2^#B  many  g : A >->> A   s.t.    f = g o g .   If B is finite  there are finitely many  g : A >->> A   s.t.   f = g o g .   If B is denumerable  (countable and infinite)   then     Aleph_0 <=  #{ g : A >->> A |  f = g o g}    <=   2^Aleph_0 . > >   But if  f : R -> R  is continous and non-increasing,  there are #R many  g : R -> R > > which are piecewise continous on countably many half-open intervals with  f = g o g .   Also, this statement is claimed for f smooth and non-increasing, then g can be taken to be piecewise smooth on the same sort of intervals. Gottfried Helms, Kassel « Next Oldest | Next Newest »

 Messages In This Thread Universal uniqueness criterion? - by bo198214 - 05/21/2008, 06:24 PM RE: Universal uniqueness criterion? - by andydude - 05/22/2008, 05:19 AM RE: Universal uniqueness criterion? - by andydude - 05/22/2008, 06:42 AM RE: Universal uniqueness criterion? - by bo198214 - 05/22/2008, 11:25 AM RE: Universal uniqueness criterion? - by andydude - 05/22/2008, 03:11 PM RE: Universal uniqueness criterion? - by bo198214 - 05/22/2008, 05:55 PM RE: Universal uniqueness criterion? - by bo198214 - 05/23/2008, 12:07 PM RE: Universal uniqueness criterion? - by Gottfried - 06/25/2008, 06:15 AM Uniqueness of analytic tetration - by Kouznetsov - 09/30/2008, 07:58 AM RE: Uniqueness of analytic tetration - by bo198214 - 09/30/2008, 08:17 AM RE: Universal uniqueness criterion? - by bo198214 - 10/04/2008, 11:19 PM RE: Universal uniqueness criterion? - by Kouznetsov - 10/05/2008, 12:22 AM RE: Universal uniqueness criterion? - by Kouznetsov - 06/19/2009, 08:45 AM RE: Universal uniqueness criterion? - by Base-Acid Tetration - 06/19/2009, 02:04 PM RE: Universal uniqueness criterion? - by bo198214 - 06/19/2009, 02:51 PM RE: Universal uniqueness criterion? - by Base-Acid Tetration - 06/19/2009, 04:19 PM RE: miner error found in paper - by bo198214 - 06/19/2009, 04:53 PM i don't think it will work - by Base-Acid Tetration - 06/19/2009, 05:17 PM RE: Universal uniqueness criterion? - by bo198214 - 06/19/2009, 06:25 PM RE: Universal uniqueness criterion? - by Base-Acid Tetration - 06/19/2009, 06:27 PM RE: Universal uniqueness criterion? - by bo198214 - 06/19/2009, 07:59 PM RE: Universal uniqueness criterion? - by Base-Acid Tetration - 06/20/2009, 02:01 PM RE: Universal uniqueness criterion? - by bo198214 - 06/20/2009, 02:10 PM RE: Universal uniqueness criterion? - by Base-Acid Tetration - 06/23/2009, 02:39 PM RE: Universal uniqueness criterion? - by Kouznetsov - 06/23/2009, 05:46 PM RE: Universal uniqueness criterion? - by Base-Acid Tetration - 06/23/2009, 09:28 PM RE: Universal uniqueness criterion? - by Kouznetsov - 06/24/2009, 05:02 AM RE: Universal uniqueness criterion? - by Base-Acid Tetration - 07/04/2009, 11:17 PM RE: Universal uniqueness criterion? - by Kouznetsov - 07/05/2009, 08:28 AM RE: Universal uniqueness criterion? - by bo198214 - 07/05/2009, 06:54 PM

 Possibly Related Threads... Thread Author Replies Views Last Post [Exercise] A deal of Uniqueness-critrion:Gamma-functionas iteration Gottfried 6 6,083 03/19/2021, 01:25 PM Last Post: tommy1729 Semi-exp and the geometric derivative. A criterion. tommy1729 0 2,979 09/19/2017, 09:45 PM Last Post: tommy1729 A conjectured uniqueness criteria for analytic tetration Vladimir Reshetnikov 13 22,876 02/17/2017, 05:21 AM Last Post: JmsNxn Uniqueness of half-iterate of exp(x) ? tommy1729 14 28,895 01/09/2017, 02:41 AM Last Post: Gottfried Removing the branch points in the base: a uniqueness condition? fivexthethird 0 3,145 03/19/2016, 10:44 AM Last Post: fivexthethird [2014] Uniqueness of periodic superfunction tommy1729 0 3,585 11/09/2014, 10:20 PM Last Post: tommy1729 Real-analytic tetration uniqueness criterion? mike3 25 40,272 06/15/2014, 10:17 PM Last Post: tommy1729 exp^[1/2](x) uniqueness from 2sinh ? tommy1729 1 4,384 06/03/2014, 09:58 PM Last Post: tommy1729 Uniqueness Criterion for Tetration jaydfox 9 18,723 05/01/2014, 10:21 PM Last Post: tommy1729 Uniqueness of Ansus' extended sum superfunction bo198214 4 11,289 10/25/2013, 11:27 PM Last Post: tommy1729

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)