07/01/2022, 08:52 PM
im not sure what you are asking.
the kneser method has a riemann mapping making it real valued tetration for its real base larger than eta ( e^(1/e) )
so that is complex going to real.
IF instead you meant complex bases , well then do you want to use a kind of base change turning them into real bases ??
and why not directly using the real bases ?
Or do you want the complex bases to give a real valued tetration ? that would not make sense imo so I guess not.
I think the gaussian method works best for base change ;
f_b(s+1) = exp( ln(b) t(s) f_b(s) )
This seems analytic in the base b.
Using that f_b in the usual way to get the gaussian method , I think will preserve analytic in the base b.
I know , I know , promoting my own ideas again , but still I believe that.
I see no reason why not.
regards
tommy1729
the kneser method has a riemann mapping making it real valued tetration for its real base larger than eta ( e^(1/e) )
so that is complex going to real.
IF instead you meant complex bases , well then do you want to use a kind of base change turning them into real bases ??
and why not directly using the real bases ?
Or do you want the complex bases to give a real valued tetration ? that would not make sense imo so I guess not.
I think the gaussian method works best for base change ;
f_b(s+1) = exp( ln(b) t(s) f_b(s) )
This seems analytic in the base b.
Using that f_b in the usual way to get the gaussian method , I think will preserve analytic in the base b.
I know , I know , promoting my own ideas again , but still I believe that.
I see no reason why not.
regards
tommy1729

