Not signed in (Sign In)

Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

  • Sign in using OpenID

Site Tag Cloud

2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry book bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration finite foundation foundations functional-analysis functor gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry graph graphs gravity grothendieck group group-theory harmonic-analysis higher higher-algebra higher-category-theory higher-differential-geometry higher-geometry higher-lie-theory higher-topos-theory homological homological-algebra homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology nlab noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pages pasting philosophy physics pro-object probability probability-theory quantization quantum quantum-field quantum-field-theory quantum-mechanics quantum-physics quantum-theory question representation representation-theory riemannian-geometry scheme schemes set set-theory sheaf sheaves simplicial space spin-geometry stable-homotopy-theory stack string string-theory superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory tqft type type-theory universal variational-calculus

Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to nForum
If you want to take part in these discussions either sign in now (if you have an account), apply for one now (if you don't).
    • CommentRowNumber1.
    • CommentAuthorzskoda
    • CommentTimeOct 21st 2011

    New entry special function, extensions to hypergeometric function, Selberg integral. New entries gamma function, recently also Euler beta function.

    Stub for elementary function.

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeOct 22nd 2011
    • (edited Oct 22nd 2011)

    At elementary function, I’ve never seen ’transcendental’ defined that way; I thought that meant a function that isn’t algebraic, e.g., e xe^x or sin(x)\sin(x). I can’t remember seeing anything other than ’non-elementary’ (or something similar) for a function not in the class of elementary functions.

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeOct 22nd 2011

    I changed the title from ’gamma function’ to Gamma function, and added some material.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorzskoda
    • CommentTimeOct 22nd 2011

    You are right about transcendental ! This way as you say is used by algebraic geometers, and this is now dominant. In special functions, it was sometimes in earlier times used the way I said, but the algebraic geometry usage is now far dominant. It should be corrected.

    For Gamma vs. gamma I would not quite agree. Some of the modern monographs on special functions which I read these days use gamma and beta when spelling the name in full, without capitals. In fact I do not recall ever seen it other way around. This has nothing to do with the capitalization of the notation, which is pretty consistent for gamma and inconsistent for Euler beta in the literature. Of course, following the notation in spelling has some information and is not a bad idea.

    I hope we will have much more in those entries in nnLab soon…

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeOct 22nd 2011

    You’re probably right about Gamma/gamma – I was looking quickly at Andrews-Askey-Roy and see they have Gamma in chapter/section titles, but gamma within the text (I haven’t gone through this super-carefully). I thought Gamma was more logical, but I’ll leave it for you to decide. Sorry for the change!

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeOct 22nd 2011

    Arguably, the proper name is ‘Γ\Gamma function’ and our naming conventions then require us to put the page at Gamma function as the nearest approximation without special characters.

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorzskoda
    • CommentTimeOct 24th 2011

    I do not know of “arguably” argument in recording the language conventjons. The way the language is it is. the name gamma function is used when the spelling is in full, i.e. in primary form. Calling it Γ\Gamma-function is just an abbreviation.

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorColin Tan
    • CommentTimeJan 23rd 2014
    Can each constant function be "obtained from the identity function, the power functions, trigonometric functions, the exponential functions and logarithmic functions by the algebraic operations and composition"? I guess we have to require constant functions as part of the initial data to define the class of elementary functions.
    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorDavidRoberts
    • CommentTimeJan 23rd 2014
    • (edited Jan 23rd 2014)

    sin² x + cos² x = 1, and surely linear combinations count…

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorColin Tan
    • CommentTimeJan 23rd 2014
    At present, the Lab entry describes algebraic operations as the ring operations. Spitulating closure under complex linear combinations is equivalent to inserting the constant functions as initial data.
    • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthorzskoda
    • CommentTimeJan 23rd 2014

    Come on, multiplication with a scalar is an algebraic operation.

    • CommentRowNumber12.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeJan 23rd 2014

    I’ve gone ahead and included the constant functions in the article, to remove any doubt. (The article hadn’t included multiplication by a scalar, which of course should be there.)