F(x) of a taylor series that looks a lot like an exponential

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around evaluating the series \(\sum{\frac{x^n}{n!}e^{cn^2}}\) and finding a function \(f(x)\) such that \(\frac{d^{n}f(0)}{dx^{n}} = e^{cn^{2}}\). Participants explore the nature of this function, considering it may be a modified exponential, and examine the implications of different values of the constant \(c\).

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that the series may correspond to a modified exponential function, particularly noting that for \(c=0\), it simplifies to \(f(x)=e^x\).
  • Another participant warns that \(c > 0\) could present problems, although this is countered by a later reply indicating that \(x < 0\) may mitigate concerns.
  • A participant proposes rewriting the series to \(\sum{\frac{(-1)^nt^n}{n!}e^{cn^2}}\) and mentions a physical process where \(\lim_{t\to\infty} f(t)=0\).
  • One participant expresses uncertainty about whether the function can be expressed as an exponential of another function, suggesting that taking the derivative complicates this possibility.
  • Another participant derives a form for \(f(x)\) using a double series expansion, leading to a polynomial times an exponential, but notes uncertainty about explicitly determining the polynomial.
  • A participant acknowledges a mistake in their earlier post regarding the equivalent problem and checks that \(f^{'}(x) = e^cf(e^{2c}x)\) holds true.
  • There is a discussion about the substitution \(u=e^{2c}x\) and the resulting differential equation, with one participant asserting that the solution does not reproduce all derivatives of \(f(x)\).
  • Another participant points out a potential error in the sign of the exponential term in the differential equation after the variable change, suggesting it should be \(e^{-c}\) instead of \(e^{+c}\).

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the form of \(f(x)\) or the implications of the constant \(c\). Multiple competing views and uncertainties remain regarding the nature of the function and the correctness of the derived equations.

Contextual Notes

Participants express concerns about the numerical stability of their approaches, especially given the wide range of \(x\) values involved. There are also unresolved issues regarding the correctness of derivative calculations and the implications of variable substitutions.

donifan
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
Hello, I am trying to evaluate the series

[tex]\sum{\frac{x^n}{n!}e^{cn^2}}[/tex]

where c is a constant. I think this problem is equivalent to find f(x) such that


[tex]\frac{d^{n}f(0)}{dx^{n}} = \frac{e^{cn^{2}}}{n!}[/tex]

I believe this must be a modified exponential since for c=0, it reduces to f(x)=e^x (also because I have plotted the solution). I have tried many things, however I still can't find the form of f(x). Any ideas?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I can't answer your question. However, warning! c > 0 may be a problem!
 
No biggie, x<0. To avoid confusion, let's write it better like

[tex] \sum{\frac{(-1)^nt^n}{n!}e^{cn^2}}[/tex]

I also know from the physical process that:

[tex]\displaystyle\lim_{t\to\infty} f(t)=0[/tex]

Thanks!
 
I'm not sure whether you can express this particular function as some sort of exponential such as [tex]e^{g(x)}[/tex] for some g(x) or not but if you take the derivative it doesn't seem likely that you can. I came up with [tex]f'(x) = e^cf(e^{2c}x)[/tex].
 
By expanding the exponential as a second series, assuming we can swap the order of summations, I get

[tex]f(x) = \sum_{m=0}^\infty \frac{c^m}{m!} \left( x\frac{d}{dx}\right)^{2m} e^x[/tex]

The derivative should work out to a polynomial times an exponential. Not sure if that polynomial can be worked out explicitly.
 
Thanks guys!

First of all, I had a mistake in the first post (nothing about the series). The equivalent problem must be:

[tex] \frac{d^{n}f(0)}{dx^{n}} = e^{cn^{2}}[/tex]


So far I was able to check that [tex]f^{'}(x) = e^cf(e^{2c}x)[/tex] (Very nice work Wizlem). I even tried making the substitution [tex]u=e^{2c}x[/tex] so that

[tex]\frac{df}{du}=e^{c}f[/tex]

which can be easily solved (with [tex]f(0)=1[/tex]) to [tex]f(x)=exp(e^{c}x)[/tex]. This however does not work as it does not reproduce all the derivatives of f(x) (actually only the first one). I am missing something there (probably st quite fundamental).

About the double expansion (which I think is equivalent to a Poisson expansion of f), I am not sure about the numerical stability especially when using many terms. x in my problem expands over 70 orders of magnitude (up to 10^50). That's is the reason why I am trying to come up with a closed form for f.
 
donifan said:
[tex]\frac{df}{du}=e^{c}f[/tex]

which can be easily solved (with [tex]f(0)=1[/tex]) to [tex]f(x)=exp(e^{c}x)[/tex]. This however does not work as it does not reproduce all the derivatives of f(x) (actually only the first one). I am missing something there (probably st quite fundamental).

I believe that you should get [itex]df/du = e^{-c}f[/itex], no? When you changed variables, you didn't seem to account for the du/dx = e^(2c) term that should get produced on the left hand side, which results in an e^(-c) instead of e^(+c) on the RHS.
 
Sorry about the typo, that's what I meant. The solution for f is actually for the right equation (the one with the minus in the RHS).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
17K