Jump to content

Talk:Confluent hypergeometric function

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rrogers314 (talk | contribs) at 15:17, 18 August 2009 (Establishing what is requested for a asymtotic solution of the confluent hypergeometric equation around infinity.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
WikiProject iconMathematics Start‑class Low‑priority
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-priority on the project's priority scale.

Whattaker function

Is U(a,b,z) the Whittaker function? (anon, Oct 2006)

I don't know, that's not what A&S calls them.linas 00:43, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am certainly not an expert, but I now know a bit about Kummer/Whittaker functions. Enough to find severe discrepancies between A&S and maple. Anybody have an opinion about whether I should tack some things up on the main page?


Kummer's function

I am interested in the real part of Kummmer's function in the case a=2n+1, b=a+1 (real part of incomplete gamma). From a numerical point of view, which is cheaper to approximate, what is the convergence like for each and what methods are used? (anon, Nov 2006)

continuous fraction for ez

The original text used to say

by setting b = 0 and c = 1

It is hard to tell what it meant because there was no c around.

M(1, 2, z)M(0, 1, z)
= 1/
1 − 12 z/
1 + 16 z/
1 − 212 z/
1 + 220 z/

1 − k(2 k − 1) (2 k) z/
1 + k(2 k) (2 k + 1) z/

= 1 + 1/ 1 − 12 z/
1 + 16 z/
1 − 16 z/
1 + 110 z/

1 − 12 (2 k − 1) z/
1 + 12 (2 k + 1) z/

Transforming this fraction with the sequence (1, 2, 3, 2, …, 2 k + 1, 2, …) gives

1/
1 − z/
2 + z/
3 − z/
2 + z/

(2 k − 1) − z/
2 + z/

= (ez − 1)z

which is not quite what was postulated.

--Yecril (talk) 13:47, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Formal power series?

The following is simply too cryptic for inclusion as it stands

Moreover,
where the hypergeometric series degenerates to a formal power series in z (which converges nowhere).

Please explain precisely what it is that this is supposed to convey, including a reference. Sławomir Biały (talk) 18:37, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: Presumably this is supposed to hold as an asymptotic series as z→0 in the right half-plane. But a reference (or at least a clarification) is needed to establish this. Sławomir Biały (talk) 19:05, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Referring to @book{andrews2000special,

 title=Template:Special functions,
 author={Andrews, G.E. and Askey, R. and Roy, R.},
 year={2000},
 publisher={Cambridge Univ Pr}

} Page 189 They agree, the formal form above diverges and they provide a convergent alternative solution by taking limits on 2F1.

Rrogers314 (talk) 20:53, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No one is disagreeing that the "formal form" diverges. The question is, what exactly is intended by the string of symbols
Because a power series it most certainly is not. Sławomir Biały (talk) 03:03, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's the result of various transformations and limits giving a asymptotic series for x "large". The above reference covers this and computes R_n(x) as O(1/x^n) . If you would like I could try to capture the reasoning or result. To give credit; how much can I quote before violating copyright? The book is succinct and I have a tendency to wander off; this means that quoting is probably preferred in some instatnces. My guess about your request is:

1) How does this form, both as symbols and series, come about

2) The effectiveness as a asymptotic series.

3) Skipping the actual intermediate details

?? Rrogers314 (talk) 15:17, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]