Interesting commutative hyperoperators ?
#4
\[b\bullet _{n+2} c = n +1+ b + c +  ((b-1)\bullet _{n+2} c) \bullet _{n+1} (b\bullet _{n+2}(c-1)) +((b-1)\bullet _{n+2} c) \bullet _{n} (b\bullet _{n+2}(c-1)) \]

\[b \bullet _{1} c=1\]
\[b \bullet _{0} c=0\]

Eg.
\(b\bullet _{2} c =1+ b + c +  ((b-1)\bullet _{2} c) \bullet _{1} (b\bullet _{2}(c-1)) +((b-1)\bullet _{2} c) \bullet _{0} (b\bullet _{2}(c-1)) \)
\(b\bullet _{2} c =b + c +  2 \)

\(b\bullet _{3} c = 2+ b + c +  ((b-1)\bullet _{3} c) \bullet _{2} (b\bullet _{3}(c-1)) +((b-1)\bullet _{3} c) \bullet _{1} (b\bullet _{3}(c-1)) \)
\(b\bullet _{3} c = 2+ b + c +  ((b-1)\bullet _{3} c) + (b\bullet _{3}(c-1)) +2 +1 \)
\(b\bullet _{3} c = 5+ b + c +  ((b-1)\bullet _{3} c) + (b\bullet _{3}(c-1)) \)

fix \(b=1\) define the function \(f(\,c)=1\bullet_3 c \) and \(g(\,c)=0\bullet_3 c+1\)

\(1\bullet _{3} (c+1)= 6 + c +  (0\bullet _{3} c+1) + 1\bullet _{3}c \)
\(f (c+1)= 6 + c +  g(\,c) + f(\,c) \) i.e. \( fS=6+I+g+f\)...

Why this should matter, is it completely defined?



If I had to define a Fibonacci-like recursion I'd do it like that: let \(F_n:\mathbb R^2\to \mathbb R\) be the "definendum" family of binary functions, and \(A(x,y),B(x,y)\) two fixed binary functions.

Additive Fibonacci operations
\(F_0(x,y)=A(x,y),\,\,\,F_1(x,y)=B(x,y)\)
\(F_{n+2}(x,y)=F_{n}(x,y)+F_{n+1}(x,y)\)

If we let \(A\) be addition and \(B\) be multiplication we get

\(F_2(x,y)=x+y+xy\) an important operation in the field of formal groups.
\(F_3(x,y)=x+y+2xy\), \(F_3(x,y)=2x+2y+3xy\), \(F_4(x,y)=3x+3y+5xy\) ...

Outer Compositional Fibonacci operations be composition of binary function defined as diagonal followed by composition
\(F_0=A,\,\,\,F_1=B\)
\(F_{n+2}=F_{n}\circ F_{n+1}\)

I.e. \(F_{n+2}(x,y)=F_{n}(F_{n+1}(x,y),F_{n+1}(x,y))\).

The computations shows that for first steps addition and multiplication \(F_{2}(x,y)=2xy\), \(F_3(x,y)=2x^2y^2\),...

Inner Compositional Fibonacci operations be composition of binary function defined as diagonal followed by composition
\(F_0=A,\,\,\,F_1=B\)
\(F_{n+2}=F_{n+1}\circ F_{n}\)

I.e. \(F_{n+2}(x,y)=F_{n+1}(F_{n}(x,y),F_{n}(x,y))\).

For \(A=+,\,B=\cdot\) we get 
\(F_{2}(x,y)=(x+y)^2\),
\(F_3(x,y)= 4(xy)^2\),
\(F_3(x,y)= 4(x+y)^4=4 x^4 + 16 x^3 y + 24 x^2 y^2 + 16 x y^3 + 4 y^4\),
\(F_4(x,y)= 64(xy)^8\)...

Mother Law \(\sigma^+\circ 0=\sigma \circ \sigma^+ \)

\({\rm Grp}_{\rm pt} ({\rm RK}J,G)\cong \mathbb N{\rm Set}_{\rm pt} (J, \Sigma^G)\)
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: Interesting commutative hyperoperators ? - by MphLee - 12/17/2022, 02:03 PM

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  All Maps Have Flows & All Hyperoperators Operate on Matrices Daniel 0 4,502 03/14/2020, 06:22 AM
Last Post: Daniel
  Logic hyperoperators hixidom 0 5,494 10/14/2015, 08:26 PM
Last Post: hixidom
  Theorem in fractional calculus needed for hyperoperators JmsNxn 5 21,683 07/07/2014, 06:47 PM
Last Post: MphLee
  Proof Ackermann function extended to reals cannot be commutative/associative JmsNxn 1 9,135 06/15/2013, 08:02 PM
Last Post: MphLee
  Hyperoperators [n] basics for large n dyitto 9 29,121 03/12/2011, 10:19 PM
Last Post: dyitto
  Hyperoperators Mr. Pig 4 16,934 06/20/2010, 12:26 PM
Last Post: bo198214
  interesting pattern in hyper-operations Base-Acid Tetration 8 31,058 05/04/2009, 09:15 PM
Last Post: BenStandeven



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)