Can the Difference of Two Hypergeometric Functions be Expressed as One Term?

BCox
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Hello:

I need to simplify the following if possible

_2F_1(a,b;c;-x^2) - _2F_1(a+1,b+1;c+1;-x^2)


In fact, a= 1/2 and c=3/2 and b>=1. In other words, the difference above that I am interested in is more specifically

_2F_1(.5, b; 1.5; -x^2) - _2F_1(.5+1, b+1; 1.5+1; -x^2)

I know that
Arctan x = x* _2F_1(1/2, 1 ; 3/2; -x^2)
which is a special case of the first term when b=1.

But I am more interested in reducing the difference at the top for any b>=1. Can I express the difference above as one term (and hopefully not as hypergeometric fct)? And how?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Using Maple, I get
<br /> {{}_2F_1(1/2,b;\,3/2;\,-{x}^{2})}-{{}_2F_1(3/2,b+1;\,5/2;\,-{x}^{2})} =<br /> \sum _{k=0}^{\infty }{\frac { \left( -1 \right) ^{k}\Gamma \left( b+k \right) {x}^{2\,k}}{\Gamma \left( b \right) \Gamma \left( k+1 \right) \left( 2\,k+1 \right) }}-\sum _{k=0}^{\infty }3\,{\frac { \left( -1 \right) ^{k}\Gamma \left( 1+b+k \right) {x}^{2\,k}}{\Gamma \left( b+1 \right) \Gamma \left( k+1 \right) \left( 2\,k+3 \right) }}<br />
<br /> =\sum _{k=0}^{\infty }-{\frac { \left( -1 \right) ^{k}{x}^{2\,k}<br /> \left( 4\,b+6\,k+3 \right) \Gamma \left( b+k \right) }{ \left( 2\,k+<br /> 3 \right) \left( 2\,k+1 \right) \Gamma \left( b+1 \right) \Gamma <br /> \left( k \right) }}<br /> =1/15\,{x}^{2} \left( 4\,b+9 \right) <br /> {{}_3F_2(3/2,b+1,2/3\,b+5/2;\,7/2,2/3\,b+3/2;\,-{x}^{2})}<br />
 
g_edgar said:
Using Maple, I get
<br /> {{}_2F_1(1/2,b;\,3/2;\,-{x}^{2})}-{{}_2F_1(3/2,b+1;\,5/2;\,-{x}^{2})} =<br /> \sum _{k=0}^{\infty }{\frac { \left( -1 \right) ^{k}\Gamma \left( b+k \right) {x}^{2\,k}}{\Gamma \left( b \right) \Gamma \left( k+1 \right) \left( 2\,k+1 \right) }}-\sum _{k=0}^{\infty }3\,{\frac { \left( -1 \right) ^{k}\Gamma \left( 1+b+k \right) {x}^{2\,k}}{\Gamma \left( b+1 \right) \Gamma \left( k+1 \right) \left( 2\,k+3 \right) }}<br />
<br /> =\sum _{k=0}^{\infty }-{\frac { \left( -1 \right) ^{k}{x}^{2\,k}<br /> \left( 4\,b+6\,k+3 \right) \Gamma \left( b+k \right) }{ \left( 2\,k+<br /> 3 \right) \left( 2\,k+1 \right) \Gamma \left( b+1 \right) \Gamma <br /> \left( k \right) }}<br /> =1/15\,{x}^{2} \left( 4\,b+9 \right) <br /> {{}_3F_2(3/2,b+1,2/3\,b+5/2;\,7/2,2/3\,b+3/2;\,-{x}^{2})}<br />


Thank you for checking in Maple. Hmmm... two things
1. Mathematica software sometimes gives erroneous analytic solutions for integration. Do we fall into that kind of error w. Maple sometimes?
2. If the above is analytically correct, can we represent the solution as exponential or trig functions?
 
We have the property such as this

Hypergeometric2F1[a,b,c,z] = (1-z)^(c-b-a)*Hypergeometric2F1[c-a,c-b,c,z]

If we wanted to keep the 2nd term of the hypergeometric function constant, what would the r.h.s. be?


Hypergeometric2F1[a,b,c,z] = something * Hypergeometric2F1[something,b,something,z]

What would the somethings be?
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top