Proving the non-existence of a function.

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter m84uily
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the non-existence of the elementary function N(x), defined by the derivative N'(g(x)) = g(x)/e^{N(g(x))}. The integral of x^x has been proven irreducible to elementary terms by Marchisotto and Zakeri, which implies that if N(x) existed, it would allow for the existence of a function I(x) defined as I(g(x)) = e^{N(g(x))}. The participants agree that under the specification of N(x) as an elementary function, its existence is not possible.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of elementary functions and their properties
  • Familiarity with calculus, specifically derivatives and integrals
  • Knowledge of the concept of irreducibility in mathematical functions
  • Awareness of contributions by mathematicians such as Marchisotto and Zakeri
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of irreducibility in elementary functions
  • Study the proofs by Marchisotto and Zakeri regarding the integral of x^x
  • Explore alternative definitions and properties of elementary functions
  • Investigate the broader implications of non-existence proofs in mathematical analysis
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, calculus students, and anyone interested in the properties of elementary functions and the implications of irreducibility in mathematical analysis.

m84uily
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
Hello! I want to know more ways to show the non-existence of the elementary function N(x).
Here's how N(x) is defined:
g(x) : Any elementary function.
N'(g(x)) = \frac{g(x)}{e^{N(g(x))}}

I've only thought of a single way to show this impossibility and it doesn't really develop my understanding of the "why" behind it very well. Here's how I went about it:

If such a function N(x) were to exist then there could also be a function I(x) which could be defined as:
I(g(x)) = e^{N(g(x))}
Which would mean:
I'(g(x)) = g(x)
\int x^x dx = I(x^x) + C
The integral of x^x has been proven irreducible to elementary terms by Marchisotto and Zakeri and therefore N(x) cannot exist for it allows the existence of I(x).

Would anyone else mind posting other lines of reasoning please?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
m84uily said:
The integral of x^x has been proven irreducible to elementary terms by Marchisotto and Zakeri and therefore N(x) cannot exist for it allows the existence of I(x).

Do not confuse " irreducible to elementary terms" with "cannot exist".
Obviuosly x^x exists, even if it is irreducible to elementary terms.
Similary, N(x) possibly exists even if it is irreducible to elementary terms.
 
Similary, N(x) possibly exists even if it is irreducible to elementary terms.

Well I had said
I want to know more ways to show the non-existence of the elementary function N(x).
Under the specification that N(x) is an elementary function, it cannot exist as I have shown.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K