I think the easiest proof is
which can only be true for a constant function.
which can only be true for a constant function.
Attempt to formally generalize log, exp functions to 3,4,5..(n,m) log exp

« Next Oldest  Next Newest »

Possibly Related Threads...  
Thread  Author  Replies  Views  Last Post  
The AB functions !  tommy1729  0  1,848 
04/04/2017, 11:00 PM Last Post: tommy1729 

the inverse ackerman functions  JmsNxn  3  6,624 
09/18/2016, 11:02 AM Last Post: Xorter 

Lookalike functions.  tommy1729  1  2,367 
03/08/2016, 07:10 PM Last Post: hixidom 

Inverse power tower functions  tommy1729  0  2,138 
01/04/2016, 12:03 PM Last Post: tommy1729 

[2014] composition of 3 functions.  tommy1729  0  2,015 
08/25/2014, 12:08 AM Last Post: tommy1729 

Intresting functions not ?  tommy1729  4  5,799 
03/05/2014, 06:49 PM Last Post: razrushil 

generalizing the problem of fractional analytic Ackermann functions  JmsNxn  17  24,829 
11/24/2011, 01:18 AM Last Post: JmsNxn 

Discreteanalytic functions  Ansus  4  6,269 
07/30/2011, 04:46 PM Last Post: tommy1729 

product functions  tommy1729  5  7,093 
06/01/2011, 05:38 PM Last Post: tommy1729 

Periodic functions that are periodic not by addition  JmsNxn  0  2,984 
04/17/2011, 09:54 PM Last Post: JmsNxn 