Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
uniqueness
#1
here are the equations that make half-iterate of exp(x) unique :

(under condition f(x) maps reals to reals and f(x) > x )

exp(x)

= f(f(x))

= D f(f(x)) = f ' (f(x)) * f ' (x)

= D^2 f(f(x)) = f '' (f(x)) * f ' (x)^2 + f ' (f(x)) * f '' (x)

= D^3 f(f(x)) = D^4 f(f(x))


regards

tommy1729
Reply
#2
tommy1729 Wrote:here are the equations that make half-iterate of exp(x) unique :

(under condition f(x) maps reals to reals and f(x) > x )

exp(x)

= f(f(x))

= D f(f(x)) = f ' (f(x)) * f ' (x)

= D^2 f(f(x)) = f '' (f(x)) * f ' (x)^2 + f ' (f(x)) * f '' (x)

= D^3 f(f(x)) = D^4 f(f(x))

Arent these equations valid for every half iterate of exp?
Reply
#3
bo198214 Wrote:
tommy1729 Wrote:here are the equations that make half-iterate of exp(x) unique :

(under condition f(x) maps reals to reals and f(x) > x )

exp(x)

= f(f(x))

= D f(f(x)) = f ' (f(x)) * f ' (x)

= D^2 f(f(x)) = f '' (f(x)) * f ' (x)^2 + f ' (f(x)) * f '' (x)

= D^3 f(f(x)) = D^4 f(f(x))

Arent these equations valid for every half iterate of exp?

NO

of course not.

for example : the first case :

exp(x) = f ' (f(x)) * f ' (x)

now consider a solution that satisfies f(f(x)) = exp(x)

and let assume f ' (x) = 0 has a finite real zero at x = r1.

thus f ' (r1) = 0

exp( r1 ) = 0 * f ' (f(r1)) => ??????

you see , contradiction.


regards

tommy1729
Reply
#4
tommy1729 Wrote:NO

of course not.

for example : the first case :

exp(x) = f ' (f(x)) * f ' (x)

now consider a solution that satisfies f(f(x)) = exp(x)

and let assume f ' (x) = 0 has a finite real zero at x = r1.

thus f ' (r1) = 0

exp( r1 ) = 0 * f ' (f(r1)) => ??????

you see , contradiction.

That just shows that there is no halfiterate with f'(x)=0 for some x.
The equation is just a consequence of , so it is valid for *every* halfiterate f (which of course must be differentiable).
Reply
#5
bo198214 Wrote:
tommy1729 Wrote:NO

of course not.

for example : the first case :

exp(x) = f ' (f(x)) * f ' (x)

now consider a solution that satisfies f(f(x)) = exp(x)

and let assume f ' (x) = 0 has a finite real zero at x = r1.

thus f ' (r1) = 0

exp( r1 ) = 0 * f ' (f(r1)) => ??????

you see , contradiction.

That just shows that there is no halfiterate with f'(x)=0 for some x.
The equation is just a consequence of , so it is valid for *every* halfiterate f (which of course must be differentiable).

yes.

so basicly its about f(x) being Coo or at least C4.

( notice bo didnt first notice , or at least didnt mention , " must be differentiable " )

i used to identies of the OP because those equations show restrictions ...

so lets restate :

conjecture

if f(f(x)) = exp(x)


f(x) is real -> real and > x

and f(x) is Coo

then f(x) is the unique solution to the above.


???
Reply
#6
tommy1729 Wrote:conjecture

if f(f(x)) = exp(x)


f(x) is real -> real and > x

and f(x) is Coo

then f(x) is the unique solution to the above.

No, it is not unique. We discussed that already here. Even if you demand that f is analytic.
Reply
#7
Ansus Wrote:I dont think uniqueness is a big problem for us now. We have a number of formulas for tetration which, it turns out, are equal.

turns out to be equal ?

that is not proven as i recall it.
Reply
#8
bo198214 Wrote:
tommy1729 Wrote:conjecture

if f(f(x)) = exp(x)


f(x) is real -> real and > x

and f(x) is Coo

then f(x) is the unique solution to the above.

No, it is not unique. We discussed that already here. Even if you demand that f is analytic.

ok , lets see.

f(f(x)) = x^4

f(x) = x^2

another solution :

f(x) = (x + q(x)) ^2 = x^2 + 2q(x)x + q(x)^2

f(f(x)) = ( x^2 + 2q(x)x + q(x)^2 + q(x^2 + 2q(x)x + q(x)^2) ) ^2

=>

( x^2 + 2q(x)x + q(x)^2 + q(x^2 + 2q(x)x + q(x)^2) ) ^2 = x^4

=> x^2 + 2q(x)x + q(x)^2 + q(x^2 + 2q(x)x + q(x)^2) = x^2

=> 2q(x)x + q(x)^2 + q(x^2 + 2q(x)x + q(x)^2) = 0

this seems very different from your 1-periodic condition of q(x) ??
Reply
#9
tommy1729 Wrote:f(x) = (x + q(x)) ^2 = x^2 + 2q(x)x + q(x)^2

f(f(x)) = ( x^2 + 2q(x)x + q(x)^2 + q(x^2 + 2q(x)x + q(x)^2) ) ^2

q must appear inside q.
Reply
#10
Ansus Wrote:I dont think uniqueness is a big problem for us now. We have a number of formulas for tetration which, it turns out, are equal.

We only know that regular, Newton and Lagrange method are equal.
But thats only a small fraction of methods.
Matrix power, intuitive Abel and Cauchy integral method are still unclear and are more important as they are applicable to .
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  A conjectured uniqueness criteria for analytic tetration Vladimir Reshetnikov 13 10,507 02/17/2017, 05:21 AM
Last Post: JmsNxn
  Uniqueness of half-iterate of exp(x) ? tommy1729 14 14,165 01/09/2017, 02:41 AM
Last Post: Gottfried
  Removing the branch points in the base: a uniqueness condition? fivexthethird 0 1,463 03/19/2016, 10:44 AM
Last Post: fivexthethird
  [2014] Uniqueness of periodic superfunction tommy1729 0 1,842 11/09/2014, 10:20 PM
Last Post: tommy1729
  Real-analytic tetration uniqueness criterion? mike3 25 20,109 06/15/2014, 10:17 PM
Last Post: tommy1729
  exp^[1/2](x) uniqueness from 2sinh ? tommy1729 1 2,135 06/03/2014, 09:58 PM
Last Post: tommy1729
  Uniqueness Criterion for Tetration jaydfox 9 10,798 05/01/2014, 10:21 PM
Last Post: tommy1729
  Uniqueness of Ansus' extended sum superfunction bo198214 4 6,457 10/25/2013, 11:27 PM
Last Post: tommy1729
  A question concerning uniqueness JmsNxn 3 5,371 10/06/2011, 04:32 AM
Last Post: sheldonison
  tetration bending uniqueness ? tommy1729 16 17,141 06/09/2011, 12:26 PM
Last Post: tommy1729



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)