Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Real and complex behaviour of the base change function (was: The "cheta" function)
#28
(08/17/2009, 05:26 PM)jaydfox Wrote:
(08/17/2009, 04:01 PM)sheldonison Wrote: I wanted to step back to the base conversion equation, in the strip where varies from 4.38 to 5.02, which would correspond more or less to sexp_e=0 to 1. The hope was to extend such a strip to the complex plane. I wanted to share a few observations about the singularities in this strip, where z = . Here f(z)=1, which corresponds to sexp_e(0).
Just a quick observation, to make sure we are speaking of the same thing. When converting from base eta to base e, I find that 5.0179 goes to 0, not 1, and which corresponds with sexp(-1), not sexp(0).

I get confused sometimes when I work with exp(z)-1 instead of actually working with the iterations of eta^z, and sometimes I forget to switch properly between the two. Perhaps you are making the same mistake? A quick sanity check in SAGE is:
Code:
eta = RR(e**(1/e));
print log(log(log(log(log(eta**(eta**(eta**(eta**(eta**5.0179)))))))));
You should get something like -0.000053416. I try to remember that 5.0179 goes to 0, and 6.3344 goes to 1, and then always double check my results inside my iterating functions. If not, it's usually because I am still working in a logarithmic or double logarithmic system.

It's a moot point, for the most part, because it's a trivial shift in the sexp function, but I wanted to make sure it got caught early before you start getting results that don't match mine, and we can't figure out why!
Yes, 5.0179 goes to zero, my mistake, and the strip of interest is 5.0179 to 6.3344. I'm trying to formulating a theory that the singularities go along with a change in the windings, where the windings suddenly increment, so it wouldn't be possible to smooth out the singularity. It seems that the graphs are smooth if a real zero crossing corresponds to an imaginary maximal with a phase of 2*(n+1)*e*pi, then the graph will be smooth, whereas if it corresponds to an imaginary maximum with a phase of 2*n*e*pi, then there will be a singularity nearby. So far I haven't gotten to demonstrating this with the real cheta function, or with the critical strip. I'm on vacation, plus my brain operates slowly when contemplating cheta and base conversions....
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: Real and complex behaviour of the base change function (was: The "cheta" function - by sheldonison - 08/18/2009, 04:37 AM

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Complex Tetration, to base exp(1/e) Ember Edison 7 908 08/14/2019, 09:15 AM
Last Post: sheldonison
  Is there a function space for tetration? Chenjesu 0 154 06/23/2019, 08:24 PM
Last Post: Chenjesu
  Can we get the holomorphic super-root and super-logarithm function? Ember Edison 10 1,397 06/10/2019, 04:29 AM
Last Post: Ember Edison
  Degamma function Xorter 0 644 10/22/2018, 11:29 AM
Last Post: Xorter
  b^b^x with base 0<b<e^-e have three real fixpoints Gottfried 1 1,964 11/07/2017, 11:06 AM
Last Post: sheldonison
  An explicit series for the tetration of a complex height Vladimir Reshetnikov 13 10,367 01/14/2017, 09:09 PM
Last Post: Vladimir Reshetnikov
  Taylor series of cheta Xorter 13 10,785 08/28/2016, 08:52 PM
Last Post: sheldonison
  2 real fixpoints again ....... tommy1729 10 8,068 02/23/2016, 10:17 PM
Last Post: tommy1729
  Should tetration be a multivalued function? marraco 17 14,756 01/14/2016, 04:24 AM
Last Post: marraco
  Introducing new special function : Lambert_t(z,r) tommy1729 2 3,193 01/10/2016, 06:14 PM
Last Post: tommy1729



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)