Testwiki:Reference desk/Archives/Mathematics/2011 August 14
Template:Error:not substituted
|- ! colspan="3" align="center" | Mathematics desk |- ! width="20%" align="left" | < August 13 ! width="25%" align="center"|<< Jul | August | Sep >> ! width="20%" align="right" |Current desk > |}
| Welcome to the Wikipedia Mathematics Reference Desk Archives |
|---|
| The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
Contents
August 14
Imaginary Fibonacci
What is the Fibonacci root of i? That is, what put into the function ((1+sqrt 5)/2)^(x)-((-1)^(x)/((1+sqrt 5)/2)^(x))))/sqrt 5 = i? Robo37 (talk) 10:57, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
- So I think you're asking us to solve , where is the expression for the Fibonacci series, which you have slightly wrong, .
- This is not an easy problem. --COVIZAPIBETEFOKY (talk) 12:56, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
- Does Wolfram Alpha's answer make sense? (I was using COVIZAPIBETEFOKY's version of your question – but Wolfram's has several different things about it). Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 13:43, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot for that, I really appreciate the help. Yeah I got my equation from the second equation listed at [1] because when I tried the first one with real integars in Google calculator I got incorrect resaults for some reason while the second one got 1 when I entered 1, 1 when I entered 2, 2 when I entered 3, 3 when I entered 4, 5 when entered 5, 8 when I entered 6... ect. Now there's something else that baffles me, howcome when I enter those answers you gave into my function I don't get i? Could you possibly calulate the same thing using my equation, out of curiousity? Thanks again. Robo37 (talk) 14:26, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
- Wait, I've got it. Thanks for linking me to that program, it looks like it could come in really handy. I still don't understand why both forumla's work differently to each other in the complex plane but the same in the real plane but that's not a burning issue of mine. Thanks a lot for the link. Robo37 (talk) 14:44, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot for that, I really appreciate the help. Yeah I got my equation from the second equation listed at [1] because when I tried the first one with real integars in Google calculator I got incorrect resaults for some reason while the second one got 1 when I entered 1, 1 when I entered 2, 2 when I entered 3, 3 when I entered 4, 5 when entered 5, 8 when I entered 6... ect. Now there's something else that baffles me, howcome when I enter those answers you gave into my function I don't get i? Could you possibly calulate the same thing using my equation, out of curiousity? Thanks again. Robo37 (talk) 14:26, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
- The problem with trying to generalise Binet's formula
- to non-integer values of x is that is negative, so its xth power is not well defined for non-integer x (see exponentiation). Even if you extract a factor of -1 to get
- (which is what I think you are attempting to do) then you have the same problem because is not well defined for non-integer x. You have two possible values for , three possible values for etc. If you allow x to take irrational or complex values the problem becomes even worse - the set of possible values becomes infinite. Gandalf61 (talk) 14:50, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
The equation is
where
and
Truncate the taylor series of the exponentials, and solve the resulting algebraic equation numerically. Bo Jacoby (talk) 10:38, 15 August 2011 (UTC).
- That gives one solution - but my point is that selecting as a value of is arbitrary - why not use or etc. For almost all non-integer values of x you have an infinite number of possible values for . Therefore there are (almost certainly) an infinite number of "Fibonacci roots" of i, not just one. Gandalf61 (talk) 16:23, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
The equation
where
has an infinite number of solutions. Not just one solution. is like a polynomial of infinite order. There has been taking care of your point. Bo Jacoby (talk) 17:57, 15 August 2011 (UTC).
The solution −1.206+0.512i was computed in J like this.
a=.^.-:>:%:5
f=.^@(a&*)+^@((-j.o.a)&*)-(j.%:5)"_
{:>{:p.f t.i.14
_1.20636j0.51203