05/27/2011, 09:36 AM
(This post was last modified: 06/02/2011, 08:09 PM by sheldonison.)
Continuing with the conjecture, \( \text{sexp}_\eta(z) = \text{cheta(z+k+\theta(z)) \), here are some more graphs, and then some comments. cheta(z) is the upper entire superfunciton of eta.
\( \theta(z) \) from z=-1+i to z=1+i, which I previously posted, where theta(z) is well behaved, and decaying as imag(z) increases.
Next, lets regenerate this graph with \( \Im(z)=0.001 \), which is closer to the real axis, and closer to the singularity at ineger values of z.
To get closer to the real axis, we need to switch to a graph of the contour of \( \text{cheta(z+k) \), by graphing the contour of
\( \text{cheta}^{[-1]}(\text{sexp}_\eta(z))-\Re(k) \). The range if this graph is identical to the previous graph, from z=-1+0.001i to 1+0.001i. Only the real part of the constant k has been included, so the imag(z) values represent the contour values of cheta(z).
This last cheta(z) contour plot is a graph of the Kneser mapping contour for cheta(z), at the real axis itself, calculating the contour \( \text{cheta}^{[-1]}(z)-k \), with a range of z from \( z=-10^{11}+e\pi i \) to \( z=+10^{11}+e\pi i \). This is equivalent to the range of z from \( \text{sexp}_\eta(-2+\delta_a) \) to \( \text{sexp}_\eta(-3-\delta_b) \), where delta_a and delta_b are very small. Near -2, \( \delta_a \approx 10^{-1634000000} \). I think that the \( \delta_b \approx 10^{-\exp(1634000000)} \)... messy arithmetic. The graph has been modified so that it matches the range from -1 to +1 from above. For base e, I have observed that the graph of the Knser mapping contour continues becoming more and more complex, as we superexponentially approach the singularity. Similar complexity may occur for base eta. I may post more in the future.
Tommy wrote:
Hey Tommy. There are some restrictions. These Kneser/Riemann mappings involve
1) a theta(z) function quickly decaying to zero at +imag infinity,
and
2) a resulting function with singularities at the integer values, where the singularities results in a Schwarz reflection, which allows the function to be defined for imag(z)<0.
We already have the regular superfunction for base e, as an example, which is Kneser mapped to produced sexp_e(z). This is another example, where the upper/entire superfunction, cheta(z) is Kneser mapped to produce sexp_eta(z).
These two restrictions, limit the kinds of functions involved. For tetration, this works for bases>eta, using the standard Kneser mapping, and for base cheta, as is conjectured.
For bases<eta, other theta(z) mappings are possible. I made an entire post about them last year, where I discussed base 2. http://math.eretrandre.org/tetrationforu...hp?tid=515
I have to refresh my memory on what I've posted, but I also derived a new different tetration solution for each base less than eta, using a Kneser mapping.
- Sheldon
\( \theta(z) \) from z=-1+i to z=1+i, which I previously posted, where theta(z) is well behaved, and decaying as imag(z) increases.
Next, lets regenerate this graph with \( \Im(z)=0.001 \), which is closer to the real axis, and closer to the singularity at ineger values of z.
To get closer to the real axis, we need to switch to a graph of the contour of \( \text{cheta(z+k) \), by graphing the contour of
\( \text{cheta}^{[-1]}(\text{sexp}_\eta(z))-\Re(k) \). The range if this graph is identical to the previous graph, from z=-1+0.001i to 1+0.001i. Only the real part of the constant k has been included, so the imag(z) values represent the contour values of cheta(z).
This last cheta(z) contour plot is a graph of the Kneser mapping contour for cheta(z), at the real axis itself, calculating the contour \( \text{cheta}^{[-1]}(z)-k \), with a range of z from \( z=-10^{11}+e\pi i \) to \( z=+10^{11}+e\pi i \). This is equivalent to the range of z from \( \text{sexp}_\eta(-2+\delta_a) \) to \( \text{sexp}_\eta(-3-\delta_b) \), where delta_a and delta_b are very small. Near -2, \( \delta_a \approx 10^{-1634000000} \). I think that the \( \delta_b \approx 10^{-\exp(1634000000)} \)... messy arithmetic. The graph has been modified so that it matches the range from -1 to +1 from above. For base e, I have observed that the graph of the Knser mapping contour continues becoming more and more complex, as we superexponentially approach the singularity. Similar complexity may occur for base eta. I may post more in the future.
Tommy wrote:
Quote:another question is : how many superfunctions can a function have ?
in this thread we have a lower and upper superfunction.
but when considering complex numbers and non-real fixpoints and general analytic functions , i wonder about how many superfunctions one can have and how to determine them.
Hey Tommy. There are some restrictions. These Kneser/Riemann mappings involve
1) a theta(z) function quickly decaying to zero at +imag infinity,
and
2) a resulting function with singularities at the integer values, where the singularities results in a Schwarz reflection, which allows the function to be defined for imag(z)<0.
We already have the regular superfunction for base e, as an example, which is Kneser mapped to produced sexp_e(z). This is another example, where the upper/entire superfunction, cheta(z) is Kneser mapped to produce sexp_eta(z).
These two restrictions, limit the kinds of functions involved. For tetration, this works for bases>eta, using the standard Kneser mapping, and for base cheta, as is conjectured.
For bases<eta, other theta(z) mappings are possible. I made an entire post about them last year, where I discussed base 2. http://math.eretrandre.org/tetrationforu...hp?tid=515
I have to refresh my memory on what I've posted, but I also derived a new different tetration solution for each base less than eta, using a Kneser mapping.
- Sheldon


