generalizing the problem of fractional analytic Ackermann functions
#16
(11/21/2011, 08:08 PM)tommy1729 Wrote: can you generate this sequence with your method ?

every intuitive solutions seems to be different , but only a few can exist.

it is unclear to me how to use carleman matrices - although i mentioned it myself - or anything else ...

i dont even have the impression anyone came close.

Oh no, I definitely cannot generate this sequence yet. I just got a little over excited with Carlemann matrices; which I think now will not work.

First of all; the law:

\( F^m \{ F^n \{ f \} \} (x) = F^{m + n} \{ f \} (x) \)

holds pretty solidly, that's really all I'm going for now. Just creating a rule by which superfunction composition follows the same way composition follows; namely

\( (f^{\circ m} \circ f^{\circ n}) (x) = f^{\circ m + n}(x) \)

Also I'm quite aware that group theory isn't limited by the number of variables. I was just referring to the fact that where your previous proof method worked, it won't now. But, I urge you to try and find a direct contradiction with the law of superfunction composition I've put forth. Even a contradiction is a step in the right direction.

Furthermore, I'm really not even working on the sequence of superfunctions themselves yet and how to generate them; just the criterion by which they need to be defined and satisfied.


(11/21/2011, 10:33 AM)Gottfried Wrote: ....


Hey Gottfried. I think I get your approach, and I'm gonna speculate that it's a coincidence the Schroeder functions for addition, multiplication and exponentiation are iterates of the exponential function.

This will not produce the hyper operations sequence when iterated; namely:

\( \exp_b^{\circ 2}(b \cdot \log_b^{\circ 2}(x)) \neq ^x b \)

However I do think that's a nifty result.

...

Returning to this superfunction sequence, I have some more tiring results

It can be proven that:

if
\( F^t \{ f \} (x) \) is a t'th superfunction of f; then \( F^t \{ f \} (x + \theta (x)) \) is also a solution where theta is a one periodic function that takes zero at \( x \in \mathbb{Z} \).

We'll also find something very similar with our superfunction sequence;

namely

if
\( F^t \{ f \} (x) \) is the t'th superfunction of f, continuous over reals, then

\( R^t \{ f \} (x) = F^{t + \theta(t)} \{ f \} (x) \) is the t'th superfunction of f, continuous over reals, satisfying the condition:

\( R \{ R^t \{ f \} \}(x) = R^{t + 1} \{ f \} (x) \) which is just like the iteration sequence we see with composition \( (f \circ f^{\circ t})(x) = f^{\circ t + 1}(x) \)

However, we would have the draw back

\( R^m \{ R^n \{ f \} \} (x) = F^{m + \theta(m)} \{ F^{n + \theta(n)} \{ f \}\} (x) = F^{m + n + \theta(m) + \theta(n)} \{ f \} (x) \neq R^{m + n} \{ f \} (x) \)

unless of course we redefine superfunction composition as; here I'll use square brackets to accentuate the differences:

\( R^m [ R^n [f] ] (x) = R^{m + n } [ f ] (x) \)

so that

\( F^{m + \theta(m)} [ F^{n + \theta(n)} [f ] ](x) = F^{m + n + \theta(m + n)} [f] (x) \)

which again, is perfectly consistent with

\( F [ F^t [f] ](x) = F^{t + 1} [ f ] (x) \)


So therefore we're going to have two layers of an infinitude of solutions for our superfunction sequence... but it continues more


we can define:
\( F \{ f \} (x) \) by Carlemann matrices, or by Kouznetsov's method, or by regular iteration of a fixpoint, or by pretty much any form that works. So which one do we choose?

This is the question I'm trying to ask; which method of making superfunctions generalizes the easiest and the best (and has the least restricted domain for the base value in the hyperoperation sequence (we all know tetration has a knack for failing b < e^(1/e); we'll probably have a similar failure for b < p involving pentation; so on and so forth) to create an infinite sequence of superfunctions, and then from that sequence, create fractional indexes.

Essentially it will be a very esoteric problem for iteration, iterating the method a superfunction is created (which most likely involves isolating a fixpoint); and then stopping halfway through that iteration to get a half superfunction.

Once we have that, we'll have to identify uniqueness faced with the dilemma \( F^t \{ f \} (x) \) is the t'th superfunction and so is \( F^t \{ f \} (x + \theta (x)) \).

And then identify another form of uniqueness given by the dillema \( F^t \{ f \} (x) \) is the t'th superfunction of f and so is \( F^{t + \theta(t)} \[ f \] (x) \).

It is all so very mind boggling!
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: generalizing the problem of fractional analytic Ackermann functions - by JmsNxn - 11/22/2011, 02:13 AM

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  [Question for Bo] about formal Ackermann laws MphLee 6 10,131 12/18/2022, 09:14 AM
Last Post: MphLee
  Is successor function analytic? Daniel 6 9,825 11/28/2022, 12:03 PM
Last Post: JmsNxn
  Ackermann fixed points Daniel 0 4,095 09/18/2022, 03:13 PM
Last Post: Daniel
  The modified Bennet Operators, and their Abel functions JmsNxn 6 10,873 07/22/2022, 12:55 AM
Last Post: JmsNxn
  The bounded analytic semiHyper-operators JmsNxn 4 16,902 06/29/2022, 11:46 PM
Last Post: JmsNxn
  On my old fractional calculus approach to hyper-operations JmsNxn 14 26,995 07/07/2021, 07:35 AM
Last Post: JmsNxn
  the inverse ackerman functions JmsNxn 3 17,083 09/18/2016, 11:02 AM
Last Post: Xorter
  Bounded Analytic Hyper operators JmsNxn 25 79,486 04/01/2015, 06:09 PM
Last Post: MphLee
  Theorem in fractional calculus needed for hyperoperators JmsNxn 5 22,299 07/07/2014, 06:47 PM
Last Post: MphLee
  Negative, Fractional, and Complex Hyperoperations KingDevyn 2 18,849 05/30/2014, 08:19 AM
Last Post: MphLee



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)