(05/16/2014, 09:21 PM)tommy1729 Wrote: Your function is equal to (x + abs(x))/2.
abs(x) can be written as sgn(x) x.
sgn(x) is well approximated by tanh(100x).
This gives that your function is very close to
(x+tanh(100x) x)/2
I've plotted this and is the same as \( max(0,x) \) or the same as \( lim_{h \rightarrow 0^+}h(ln(e^{0/h}+e^{x/h}))=max(0,x) \)
...
I know this but I was loking for a function that coincides with \( max(1,x)-1=max(0,x-1) \) only for the naturals...
If I did not understand something of your formula of approximation tell me.
Quote:The problem with your function is that it has all positive integers as fixpoints.Ok..I don't get this (I'm not good with analysis and the iteration theory)...
Too many fixpoints to have half-iterates valid everywhere.
but help to to understand pls.
A fixpoint is a x such that \( A(x)=x \) in the case of \( A(0)=0 \)... is it the only fixpoint of A?
Maybe you talk about the fact that \( A^{n}(0)=0 \) and \( A^{n}(m)=max(0,m-n) \) for every \( n \). This is really a big problem for the real iteration problem?
Quote:Im not sure if you want an interpolation or an approximation like I just gave.Yea I know, the question is a bit unclear and is because I don't exatly know what to ask..or how to ask it. I'm a bit confused about this problem but it is very interesting for me and I think it can be important for oher things I'm doing.
Also the reason you get little response is probably because your mainly asking " what makes this question more intresting " ?
If you know what I mean.
Asking what properties to look for or asking what questions to ask is similar.
You have to decide what you want to do , want to see solved or what properties you desire.
Otherwise it sounds weird. Kinda like asking for " a special integer ".
Math is like driving a car without a map.
You dont know where you will end up. But if you want to end up somewhere you have too start , stop and drive.
I hope my metaphor is understood.
Quote:I assume you are still young. You dont have to tell me about your age but I suspect it.
Hope you dont mind me saying.
regards
tommy1729
Don't worry I'm enough young (but not very very young)
Maybe you feel more my lack of knowledge on some really basic topics...I don't study math at school probably thats why.
Mother Law \(\sigma^+\circ 0=\sigma \circ \sigma^+ \)
\({\rm Grp}_{\rm pt} ({\rm RK}J,G)\cong \mathbb N{\rm Set}_{\rm pt} (J, \Sigma^G)\)
