Integral of x^x: Does It Exist?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter gulsen
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integral
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the integral of the function \( x^x \), specifically whether it exists in closed form and the nature of its antiderivatives. Participants explore various aspects of the integral, including its classification as potentially nonelementary and its relation to special functions.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the integral \( \int x^x \, dx \) does not have a solution in closed form, suggesting it is a nonelementary integral.
  • Others propose that while \( \int x^x \, dx \) may not exist in closed form, related integrals like \( \int (\ln x + 1) x^x \, dx \) do exist in closed form.
  • One participant mentions that \( F(x) = \int_{0}^{x} t^{t} dt + 1 \) can represent the integral, but emphasizes that it cannot be expressed in terms of elementary functions.
  • There is a discussion about the algorithms used to determine if a function's integral can be expressed in terms of elementary functions, with some participants noting that this is a complex area of study.
  • References to the "Sophomore's Dream" function are made, with some participants clarifying that it typically refers to specific integrals involving \( x^x \) rather than the function itself.
  • Questions arise regarding the complex properties of the integral, including its poles and branch cuts, with some participants expressing uncertainty about these aspects.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the existence of a closed-form solution for the integral of \( x^x \). Multiple competing views are presented regarding its classification as a nonelementary integral and its relationship to special functions.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the discussion includes unresolved mathematical steps and varying definitions of what constitutes an elementary function, which complicates the analysis of the integral.

gulsen
Messages
215
Reaction score
0
Is there a solution for \int x^x dx, I wonder...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It is, but not in closed form. However, we're pretty sure that

\int \left(ln x +1) x^{x} \ dx

exists in closed form...Even though neither of the 2 integrals involved in it exist in closed form.

Daniel.
 
This integral doesn't have a solution . Say will be great to know the solution of this integral :!)
Function x^x
This function cannot be integrated.
Most likely it's a nonelementary integral. from http://www.numberempire.com/integralcalculator.php.
 
GoldNow said:
This integral doesn't have a solution . Say will be great to know the solution of this integral :!)
Function x^x
This function cannot be integrated.
Most likely it's a nonelementary integral. from http://www.numberempire.com/integralcalculator.php.
1. Please, do not do paleontological research here at PF. This thread is 4 years old
2. x^x is an integrable function, because it is continuous
 
I am new here and can you give me this function ? I love it to see it .
 
Indeed.
It is called F(x), and can be represented as follows:
F(x)=\int_{0}^{x}t^{t}dt+1

A number of other representations of it is possible, none of them in terms of a finite combination of elementary functions.
 
I remember from my calc III course that there are some algorithms to determine if a given function's integral is expressible in terms of elementary function. Unfortunately I don't remember the details.
Does someone know how to prove for a given function that it will never show up as a derivative of an elementary function?

Of course, "elementary function" can be defined in different ways, but that's not my point.

And sorry for hijacking the thread, this just came to my mind when I read your posts.
 
Does someone know how to prove for a given function that it will never show up as a derivative of an elementary function?
Of course, "elementary function" can be defined in different ways, but that's not my point.
Many functions which aren't "derivatives of elementary functions" (as commonly said) can be expressed in terms of an infinite series of elementary functions. But don't split hairs !
Proving for a given function that it will never show up as a derivative of a FINITE number of elementary functions is a different ball game. It was done in some particular and limited cases, but not in general. Present mathematical theory in this field isn't advanced enough.
For French speakers only : an essay on special functions, presented as a scientific review for general public, is avalable through the link :
http://www.scribd.com/people/documents/10794575-jjacquelin
Then, select the e-paper: "Safari au pays des fonctions spéciales"
.
By the way, an integral of x^x is knows as a special function, namely the "Sophomore's dream" function.
 
Last edited:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risch_algorithm" is used to determine if an antiderivative can be evaluated in terms of elementary functions and if so, it evaluates them.

Also, the "Sophomores Dream" usually refers to the result \int^1_0 \frac{1}{x^x} dx = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{1}{n^n} also sometimes it is used to refer to \int^1_0 x^x dx = - \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} (-n)^{-n}. It never refers to a function.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #10
"Somophores dream" :
It never refers to a function.
:smile: Well, if not, why not the "Masters dream function" ? :smile:
 
  • #13
JJ, You seem to know a lot about this "int x^x" function - does it have poles or zeros on the complex plane? does it have the same branch cuts as x ln(x) (or ln(x)) ??
That's the real importance of creating a new function ... to know the pole/zero/cut structure
I am asking because integral(-inf,+inf) exp(-|w|/2) w^(i/pi w ln |w|+i w x) seems to have a pole at -pi^2/6... but I don't know why it would have a pole there...
 
  • #14
JJ, You seem to know a lot about this "int x^x" function - does it have poles or zeros on the complex plane? does it have the same branch cuts as x ln(x) (or ln(x)) ??
That's the real importance of creating a new function ... to know the pole/zero/cut structure
In fact, I don't know a lot about this "int x^x" function, as it is written : "My own contribution will here appear so modest in the light of all that still remains to be done", page 3 in the paper "The Sophomores Dream Function",
http://www.scribd.com/JJacquelin/documents
Especially, the section 11 Complex arguments, is quite empty. Study was not advanced enough. Only in case of more available results they could be added in a new edition. Moreover, I expect that more publications will be made by other authors in order to increase the background. As it is written "it will depend on many contributors".
I am asking because integral(-inf,+inf) exp(-|w|/2) w^(i/pi w ln |w|+i w x) seems to have a pole at -pi^2/6... but I don't know why it would have a pole there...
The question is interesting. Unfortunately I am not sure to correctly read the integral. I suppose that dw is missing. Also w^(i/pi w ln |w|+i w x) looks confusing for me. Would you like rewrite the whole integral more clearly ?
 
  • #15
Hi! JJ,
The integral I am seeking to evaluate is

int_{-\inf}^{+\inf) exp(-|w|/2) exp( i w [ln(|w|)/pi-x]) dw

a definite integral which is a function of x...

I don't know why, but this function seems to have a singularity at -pi^2/6

This does have a physical application: it would be the minimum phase impulse
response of a cable having losses linear with frequency,,,
 
  • #16
lamarche said:
Hi! JJ,
The integral I am seeking to evaluate is

int_{-\inf}^{+\inf) exp(-|w|/2) exp( i w [ln(|w|)/pi-x]) dw

a definite integral which is a function of x...

I don't know why, but this function seems to have a singularity at -pi^2/6

This does have a physical application: it would be the minimum phase impulse
response of a cable having losses linear with frequency,,,
Since this has no relation to the integral of x^x I recommend you start a new thread rather than add onto this one.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K