Sum formula for the modified Bessel function

Hanyu Ye
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hi, everybody. Mathematic handbooks have given a sum formula for the modified Bessel function of the second kind as follows
NumberedEquation1.gif

I have tried to evaluate this formula. When z is a real number, it gives a result identical to that computed by the 'besselk ' function in MATLAB. However, when z is a complex number, the two results don't agree. What's wrong? Thanks a lot.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Hi Hanyu,
I looked into some other series expansions, and found this one...from wolfram.com. It looks almost exactly like the one you were using above except for the ##I_n(z)## in your post was replaced by another sum formula.
upload_2015-6-2_16-47-19.png
Using this in matlab, I was able to get the same results as besselk for a sample of real and imaginary points.
So...I would look into the requirements for the function ##I_n(z)## that you were using to see if there are complications from the imaginary input.

Below is how I input it into matlab:
[\code]
function A=Kest(n,z);
expand = 10;
sum1 = 0;
for k = 0 :expand
sum1 = sum1 + (z/2)^(2*k)/factorial(k)/factorial(k+n);
end
term1 = (-1)^(n-1)*log(z/2)*(z/2)^n*sum1;

sum2 = 0;
%if n==0
%else
for k = 0:n-1
sum2 = sum2+(-1)^k*factorial(n-k-1)/factorial(k)*(z/2)^(2*k);
end
%end
term2 = sum2*1/2*(z/2)^(-n);

sum3 = 0;
for k = 0 :expand
sum3 = sum3 + (psi(k+1)+psi(k+n+1))/factorial(k)/factorial(k+n)*(z/2)^(2*k);
end
term3 = sum3*(-1)^n/2*(z/2)^n;
A = term1+term2+term3;
[/code]
 
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.

Similar threads

Back
Top