Can a Function Be Self-Containing?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Trepidation
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Functions
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of functions that may contain themselves, particularly focusing on recursive functions and the challenges of isolating a function from within itself. Participants explore mathematical properties and potential methods for handling such functions, including specific examples and equations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant introduces a function defined as f(x) = a(f(x)) + x and derives a form f(x) = x/(1-a), questioning the validity of this approach and seeking clarification on whether such functions can be considered "self-containing."
  • Another participant agrees that the approach is valid and describes the function as recursive, noting that replacing a function with a variable is acceptable.
  • A subsequent post raises a new question about isolating a function P(w) from an equation involving itself, specifically P(w) = N(w)/D(P(w)), and asks if it is possible to define P(w) without it appearing within itself.
  • One participant expresses doubt about isolating P(w) without knowing the form of D, suggesting that if D is unknown, reversing its transformation on P(w) is not feasible.
  • Another participant provides an example where isolating P(w) leads to an equation that cannot be solved in closed form, indicating that certain forms of self-referential functions may be unsolvable.
  • A later reply clarifies that the participant knows the forms of functions D and N but struggles with isolating P due to the nature of the equation, reiterating the complexity of the problem.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the validity of recursive functions but express differing views on the feasibility of isolating a function from within itself. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the specific methods for achieving this isolation.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependency on the forms of functions D and N, which are not fully defined in the context of the discussion. The complexity of the equations and the nature of self-referential functions contribute to the uncertainty in finding solutions.

Trepidation
Messages
29
Reaction score
0
First off, I'd like to say that I'm new here and not very advanced. I'm really here in the hopes of learning something, so that my mathematical tools might match up with the mathematical level of my ideas ><.

So... First off: Is it possible for a function to contain itself? For instance, here's something I've been messing around with today:

[tex]f(x) = a ( f(x) ) +x[/tex]

Now... If I change the notation from [tex]f(x)[/tex] to [tex]y[/tex] for clarity, I get this equation, which I can rearrange in the following way:

[tex]y = ay + x[/tex]

[tex]y - ay = x[/tex]

[tex]y(1-a) = x[/tex]

[tex]y = \frac{x}{1-a}[/tex]

And, returning the notation to its original form:

[tex]f(x) = \frac{x}{1-a}[/tex]


In which case, my result (without all of the work I posted above) would be that

[tex]f(x) = a( f(x) ) + x[/tex]

is identical to

[tex]f(x) = \frac{x}{1-a}[/tex]


Is this correct, or incorrect; is there some property of functions that makes what I've done wrong? If it is correct, is there a name for this sort of "self-containing" function?

Thanks in advance for your replies... ^^
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Yes, that is valid. I would call it recursive, but I am a programmer, not a mathematician. Replacing a function with a variable in that case, though, is fine.
 
Alright, that's good then. Thank you. ^^

So... This is as different from what I just asked about as multiplication is from addition. But I guess it's related somehow ><.

Is it possible to solve this equation excusively for the function P(w)? What I mean is, isolate P(w) completely to one side, defining the function, without having it appear anywhere within itself. No D(P(w)) or anything like that.

And, if so, how, if you know? Or do you not know at all ><? My problem:

[tex]P(w) = \frac{N(w)}{D(P(w))}[/tex]
 
I do not know of a way to take a function outside of another unknown function. If you know what the function “D” is, though, just replace it with the formula inside that function, and simplify.

The problem is that, if you do not know what the function D looks like, you do not know how it is transforming P(w), and therefore, you do not know how to reverse that to get it out of it… though I am not very advanced in mathematics, do not trust me that it is impossible with an unknown function! :)
 
In general, the answer is no. For example, let [tex]N(w)=1[/tex] , let [tex]D(u)=sin(u)[/tex], and call [tex]P(w)=y[/tex],then your problem is: [tex]y*Sin(y)=1[/tex], in this case P(w) will just equal a constant which is about as simple as a function can get, but it can't be found in closed form, which I would call unsolvable.
(p.s. y can be found approximately using root finding methods, like Newtons method)
 
I know what function D and function N are. P is the unknown. I can't use the inverse of D, because if I do, it looks like this:

[tex]P(w) = \frac{N(w)}{D(P(w))}[/tex]

[tex]P(w) * D(P(w)) = N(w)[/tex]

[tex]D^{-1}(P(w)) * P(w) = D^{-1}(N(w))[/tex]

As you can see, that doesn't help at all. Which is why I ask if it can be done at all...? It might, I don't know. And if it can, I really need to know how ><.

Thanks again for your help so far!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
5K