Why does the graph of x^x undefined for x is less than or equal to 0?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter tahayassen
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Graph
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the mathematical function f(x) = x^x and its behavior for values of x less than or equal to zero. Participants explore the implications of defining this function in the context of real and complex numbers, addressing both theoretical and computational aspects.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that f(-1) = (-1)^(-1) = -1, but others point out that according to Wolfram Alpha, f(-1) does not exist.
  • It is proposed that the function is only defined at integer points for negative values, as non-integer values lead to complex results, which are not defined in the real number system.
  • One participant rewrites the function as f(x) = exp(x * ln(x)), highlighting that ln(x) is undefined for x < 0.
  • Another participant mentions that the graph of the function indicates that at x = -1, the output is imaginary, with a real part of -1 and an imaginary part of 0.
  • There is a discussion about the limitations of computational tools in representing the function for x < 0, questioning why the real part exists in complex plots but not in real-valued plots.
  • One participant elaborates on the logarithmic properties of negative numbers, suggesting that the function can be expressed in terms of cosine and sine functions for negative integers.
  • Another participant emphasizes that the function is defined as a real value only for positive reals and negative integers, while negative reals yield complex results that cannot be simplified further.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the definition and behavior of the function for negative values, with no consensus reached on the implications of these definitions. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the nature of the function in the complex plane versus the real number system.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations related to the definitions of logarithmic functions for negative inputs, the behavior of the function at non-integer points, and the computational representation of the function in various contexts.

tahayassen
Messages
269
Reaction score
1
Let f(x)=(x)^(x)

f(-1)=(-1)^(-1)
=1/-1
=-1

But according to wolframalpha, f(-1) does not exist.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
The function works only in integer point. For each non integer point the function goes in Complex Set, and so isn't defined on real. Easilly, to avoid the calculator have problem on any other point lesser then 0, the programmer block each of that point with "does not exist" message.

Fruthermore I can rewrite the f(x) in this way:
f(x)=exp(x*ln(x)).
And ln(x<0) is undefined.
 
G.I. said:
Fruthermore I can rewrite the f(x) in this way:
f(x)=exp(x*ln(x)).
And ln(x<0) is undefined.

ln (-x) = ln(x) + [itex]i \pi[/itex]

tahayassen said:
Let f(x)=(x)^(x)
But according to wolframalpha, f(-1) does not exist.

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=(-1)^(-1)

It says "negative 1". :)
 
Best Pokemon said:
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=f(x)+=+x^x

If you look at the graph of the function itself (without plugging anything in) you will see that it shows that at x=-1 it is imaginary.

That graph show that the imaginary part of f(-1) is 0 and that the real part is -1. That is, f(-1) = -1 + 0i.

It's as the first reply said, f(x)=x^x is not (in general) a real valued function for x<0, though it is real for the negative integers.
 
So it's a matter of limitations of computers/programming that x<0 doesn't exist for the real-valued plot? Why does the real part for x<0 exist on the complex-valued plot?
 
Remember x^x = (e^(log(x)))^x = e^(x*log(x))

log (-x) = log(x) + [itex]i\pi[/itex]

This means that you'll have the magnitude x^(-x), and the angle x*i*pi.

With the angle you'll have:

cos (x*pi) * x^(-x) for the real portion and
sin (x*pi) *x^(-x) for the imaginary portion.


Correct this if I made a mistake.. tired. :)
 
Knowing that [itex]z=r\exp(i\theta + 2ki\pi)[/itex] where [itex]r=|z|=\sqrt{\Re^2(z)+\Im^2(z)}[/itex], [itex]\theta=\mathrm{arg}(z)=\mathrm{atan2}(\Im(z),\Re(z))[/itex] and k is an arbitrary integer, one has [itex]\log(z)=\log(r) + i\theta + 2ki\pi = \log|z| + i\mathrm{arg}(z) + 2ki\pi[/itex]. Now, we consider our function for an arbitrary negative integer, with the principal branch of the complex logarithm (k=0):

[tex](-x)^(-x) = \exp((-x)\log(-x)) = \frac{1}{\exp(x\log(-x))} = \frac{1}{\exp(\log(x)+xi\pi)}=<br /> \frac{1}{x(\cos(x\pi)+i\sin(x\pi))}[/tex]

Now, note that if x was not an integer, we would be stuck here. However, we know for integer x, [itex]\cos(x\pi) = (-1)^x[/itex] and [itex]\sin(x\pi) = 0[/itex], which leaves us with our final answer:

[tex]= \frac{1}{x(-1)^x}[/tex]

So why did I go through this? I wanted to show why Wolfram does not display the graph for [itex]x \leq 0[/itex]. The function is defined as a real value only in the positive reals and the negative integers. For negative reals, we get the ugly-looking answer [itex]\displaystyle \frac{1}{x(\cos(x\pi)+i\sin(x\pi))} = \frac{\cos(\pi x)-i\sin(\pi x)}{x}[/itex], which can't be simplified further.
 
tahayassen said:
Let f(x)=(x)^(x)

f(-1)=(-1)^(-1)
=1/-1
=-1

But according to wolframalpha, f(-1) does not exist.

this answer is correct
 
  • #10
Millennial said:
So why did I go through this? I wanted to show why Wolfram does not display the graph for [itex]x \leq 0[/itex].
I saw the graph on Wolfram Alpha. Really nice pretty one if you constrain the x variable:
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?...*Plot.plotlowerrange-.*Plot.plotupperrange---

Note... I am a fan of the Alpha. I also think the borderline ASD having character in Alphas is pretty awesome... and hilarious. Do you like strange tangents? :p

Millennial said:
The function is defined as a real value only in the positive reals and the negative integers. For negative reals, we get the ugly-looking answer [itex]\displaystyle \frac{1}{x(\cos(x\pi)+i\sin(x\pi))} = \frac{\cos(\pi x)-i\sin(\pi x)}{x}[/itex], which can't be simplified further.

It's actually (so you don't confuse people- look at the first post):
[tex]\dfrac{\cos(\pi x)-i\sin(\pi x)}{x^x}[/tex]
or (rewritten version of my post above your post):
[tex]{x^{-x}}\times \left({\cos(\pi x)-i\sin(\pi x)}\right)[/tex]
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 66 ·
3
Replies
66
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
6K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K