Weird pattern in exponentiation

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter StatusX
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Weird
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a pattern observed in the operations of addition, multiplication, and exponentiation on three numbers x, y, and z. Participants explore the arrangement of these operations and their implications on the size of the written formulas and the values of the expressions, particularly for large numbers.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a pattern in the expressions involving addition, multiplication, and exponentiation, suggesting a link between the structure of the formulas and their values for large numbers.
  • Another participant questions the notion of the arrangement being "natural," arguing that any arrangement would yield similar results.
  • A different participant defends the arrangement as regular and suggests it reflects an order of increasing value for large x, y, and z.
  • Further discussion raises the idea that while the arrangement may seem arbitrary, it could represent an increasing order of the "power" of the first operation, with some uncertainty about the values for specific ranges of x, y, and z.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the significance of the arrangement of operations, with some finding it meaningful and others viewing it as arbitrary. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of the observed pattern.

Contextual Notes

There is uncertainty regarding the validity of the claim that the expressions are in increasing order of value for large numbers, as well as the criteria for determining what constitutes a "natural" arrangement.

StatusX
Homework Helper
Messages
2,570
Reaction score
2
I was looking at the different ways the operations +, *, and exponentiation can work on three numbers x, y, and z. I found a weird pattern when the second operation performed is exponentiation. These are the expressions:

[tex](x+y)^z \ x^{(y+z)} \ (x \cdot y)^z \ x^{(y \cdot z)} \ (x^y)^z \ x^{(y^z)}[/tex]

Notice how I arranged them in a natural way, where the first operation(inside the parantheses) is (+,+,*,*,^,^), and the second operation, exponentiation, is carried out on the (R,L,R,L,R,L) of the parantheses. Now look at the pattern:

[tex](x+y)^z \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ x^{(y+z)} \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ (x \cdot y)^z \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ x^{(y \cdot z)} \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ (x^y)^z \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ x^{(y^z)}[/tex]

largest ...<- identical ->... | ...<- indentical ->... largest

written ... written ... | ... value ..... value
formula ... formula

I'm sorry if this doesn't format right, but I'll explain what it means. [tex](x+y)^z[/tex] has the largest identity expression, in terms of the size of the written formula: the binomial theorem. [tex]x^{(y+z)}[/tex] and [tex](x \cdot y)^z[/tex] are equal to [tex]x^y \cdot x^z[/tex] and [tex]x^z \cdot y^z[/tex] respectively, so the shape of their written formulas are identical. [tex]x^{(y \cdot z)}[/tex] is equal in value to [tex](x^y)^z[/tex]. And finally, [tex]x^{(y^z)}[/tex] has the largest value, for x,y,z>>1.

This seems like a very bizarre link between the "man-made" (sort of) written formulas and the "completely natural" values of these expressions. Is there anything to this, or is it just a coincidence?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I have no idea why you consider your arrangement to be "in a natural way". There would be absolutely no difference that I can see if you were to arrange them in any other way.
 
They are arranged regularly. You might argue if its natural or not, although I'm pretty sure they are in order of increasing value for x,y,z >>1, which seems pretty natural.
 
So does this need to be explained, or am I reading too much into it? I could see how you might argue the arrangement is arbitrary, but its at least in increasing order of the "power" of the first operation, ie., (+,+),(*,*),(^,^). Then the only choice I made that may seem arbitrary is which side the exponent should be on in the first of each pair, and I picked the right side. But like I said, I also think they are in order of value for numbers >>1 (maybe just >2?), but I'm not completely sure about that.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
780
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K