![]() |
|
conjecture 666 : exp^[x](0+si) - Printable Version +- Tetration Forum (https://tetrationforum.org) +-- Forum: Tetration and Related Topics (https://tetrationforum.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Mathematical and General Discussion (https://tetrationforum.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=3) +--- Thread: conjecture 666 : exp^[x](0+si) (/showthread.php?tid=1324) |
conjecture 666 : exp^[x](0+si) - tommy1729 - 05/15/2021 Many many years ago I conjectured the following : Consider exp iterations of a starting value \( y=0+si \) for \( 0<s<2 \). It seems for all such s , after some iterations we get close to 0. So we search for positive real x > 1 , such that \( exp^{[x]}(y)=0 \) or it gets very close. I believe an upper bound for x is \( bound(x)=1+exp(s^2+s+1/s) \) I gave it the funny name conjecture 666 because by the formula above : \( bound(2)=666.141.. \) ![]() Notice the formula does not extend correctly to values such as \( s=\pi \) since that sequence will never come close to zero. A sharper bound is probably attainable. But how ? Is there an easy way ? For 1/2<s<2 this might be achievable by computer search ? And/or calculus ? But is there an easy or short proof ? Notice that taking derivatives of exp(exp(... is not easier than computing exp(exp(... so it seems hard to shortcut the problem. I was inspired to share this idea of mine here because of memories of some people on sci.math. What do you guys think ? Regards tommy1729 RE: conjecture 666 : exp^[x](0+si) - JmsNxn - 05/16/2021 I believe Milnor has something to say about this, I'll try and check his book later. The gist is, that \( \exp^{\circ n}(z) \) gets arbitrarily close to \( 0 \) for almost all \( z \) (it misses on a Lebesgue measure zero set (which are the periodic points)). I believe Milnor has a section discussing how to estimate the size of \( n \); particularly, if I recall correctly; it'll give a nice bound on the size of \( n \) in relation to its nearness to 0... It's something to do with Julia sets; I can't remember perfectly. I can't remember if it's Milnor though; or I read it somewhere else. I'll have to look through the book again... EDIT: ACK! I'm having trouble finding it; but from memory, there's a word for it. Consider \( f:\mathbb{C}\to\mathbb{C} \). Take a neighborhood \( \mathcal{N} \) about a point \( z \in \mathcal{J}(f) \) (the julia set of \( f \)). Then the orbits of \( f \) on \( \mathcal{N} \) are dense in \( \mathcal{J}(f) \). From here you can create a function, \( N(\mathcal{N},L,\epsilon)= n\\ \) Such that some point of \( z' \in \mathcal{N} \) satisfies \( |f^{\circ n}(z') - L| < \epsilon \) for some \( L \in \mathcal{J}(f) \). (or something like this.) I believe there is a way to estimate this function; I can't seem to find it at the moment. I'll keep looking. RE: conjecture 666 : exp^[x](0+si) - tommy1729 - 05/17/2021 It would be very useful to have such an estimate formula !! The problems reminds me of " the opposite question " where we measure when we get " away " , rather then within boundaries as my conjecture studies ; see attachement regards tommy1729 |