Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.soft-sys.math.maple > #285
| From | Axel Vogt <&noreply@axelvogt.de> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.soft-sys.math.maple |
| Subject | Re: A hypergeom evaluation |
| Date | 2012-01-05 19:44 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <9mm9ciFv2jU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <874nwbgvid.fsf@san.rr.com> <6d7f5214-ccd9-4a00-aaa2-4d6734cffb03@v14g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> <050120120621094821%edgar@math.ohio-state.edu.invalid> <9mlo0mFk2uU1@mid.individual.net> <413bc08a-2d0e-4f36-97d4-b65e1dfa9bea@ck5g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> |
On 05.01.2012 19:01, Peter Luschny wrote:
> On 5 Jan., 14:47, Axel Vogt<&nore...@axelvogt.de> wrote:
>
>> http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=HypergeometricPFQ%28{1%2C+1%2F2%2C+0}%2C{1%2C+0}%2Cx%29
>> That shows the bug - giving 1 for all x.
>
> Hi Axel,
>
> I get the impression there is more than a single bug lurking beneath
> all that.
...
> Peter
I meant, that Mathematica has a bug, since in the unit
disc that stands for 1/sqrt(1-x).
Sorry for the odd link, HypergeometricPFQ([1, 1/2, 0], [1, 0], x)
is what you have to enter at Wolframalpha, it is f(1,1, x) where
f:= (n,m, x) -> (m/n)*2^(n-m)*binomial(2*n-m-1,n-m)*
Hypergeom([1/2+m/2,m/2,m-n],[m,1+m-2*n],x); # Upper Case !
Maple writes it as Hypergeom([1, 1/2, 0],[1, 0],x). Either using
'value' or considering that in the unit disc as series it cab be
written as hypergeom([1/2],[],x), since the same nominators and
denominators cancel out.
Using simplify (or looking up books) this can be seen as square
root.
For the other part in your post I will answer separately.
Back to comp.soft-sys.math.maple | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
A hypergeom evaluation Peter Luschny <peter.luschny@googlemail.com> - 2012-01-04 09:22 -0800
Re: A hypergeom evaluation Joe Riel <joer@san.rr.com> - 2012-01-04 10:42 -0800
Re: A hypergeom evaluation Axel Vogt <&noreply@axelvogt.de> - 2012-01-04 19:59 +0100
Re: A hypergeom evaluation Peter Luschny <peter.luschny@googlemail.com> - 2012-01-04 11:08 -0800
Re: A hypergeom evaluation "G. A. Edgar" <edgar@math.ohio-state.edu.invalid> - 2012-01-05 06:21 -0700
Re: A hypergeom evaluation Axel Vogt <&noreply@axelvogt.de> - 2012-01-05 14:47 +0100
Re: A hypergeom evaluation Peter Luschny <peter.luschny@googlemail.com> - 2012-01-05 10:01 -0800
Re: A hypergeom evaluation Axel Vogt <&noreply@axelvogt.de> - 2012-01-05 19:44 +0100
Re: A hypergeom evaluation Peter Luschny <peter.luschny@googlemail.com> - 2012-01-05 11:57 -0800
Re: A hypergeom evaluation Axel Vogt <&noreply@axelvogt.de> - 2012-01-06 11:37 +0100
Re: A hypergeom evaluation Peter Luschny <peter.luschny@googlemail.com> - 2012-01-06 03:51 -0800
Re: A hypergeom evaluation Axel Vogt <&noreply@axelvogt.de> - 2012-01-06 14:47 +0100
Re: A hypergeom evaluation "G. A. Edgar" <edgar@math.ohio-state.edu.invalid> - 2012-01-07 06:10 -0700
Re: A hypergeom evaluation Axel Vogt <&noreply@axelvogt.de> - 2012-01-05 20:05 +0100
Re: A hypergeom evaluation Peter Luschny <peter.luschny@googlemail.com> - 2012-01-05 12:17 -0800
Re: A hypergeom evaluation Axel Vogt <&noreply@axelvogt.de> - 2012-01-05 23:02 +0100
csiph-web