* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Subrecursive Sum Approximations of Irrational Numbers
Survey
Document related concepts
Infinitesimal wikipedia , lookup
Law of large numbers wikipedia , lookup
Location arithmetic wikipedia , lookup
Georg Cantor's first set theory article wikipedia , lookup
Large numbers wikipedia , lookup
Elementary arithmetic wikipedia , lookup
Fundamental theorem of algebra wikipedia , lookup
Approximations of π wikipedia , lookup
Real number wikipedia , lookup
Mathematics of radio engineering wikipedia , lookup
Non-standard calculus wikipedia , lookup
Elementary mathematics wikipedia , lookup
Transcript
Welcome! Subrecursive Sum Approximations of Irrational Numbers Lars Kristiansen Department of Mathematics, University of Oslo Department of Informatics, University of Oslo Introduction A function C : N → Q is a Cauchy sequence for the real number α when 1 |α − C (n)| < n . 2 A function C : N → Q is a Cauchy sequence for the real number α when 1 |α − C (n)| < n . 2 A function E : N → Z is the base-2 expansion of the real number α when E (n) ∈ {0, 1} for n ≥ 1 ∞ X E (i) α = E (0) + 2i i=1 A function C : N → Q is a Cauchy sequence for the real number α when 1 |α − C (n)| < n . 2 A function E : N → Z is the base-2 expansion of the real number α when E (n) ∈ {0, 1} for n ≥ 1 ∞ X E (i) α = E (0) + 2i i=1 A function D : Q → {0, 1} is a Dedekind cut for the real number α when D(q) = 0 iff q < α . A Cauchy sequence can be subrecursively computed in a base-2 expansion, but. . . we cannot turn a Cauchy sequence into a base-2 expansion by subrecursive means; this requires unbounded search, that is, full Turing computability. A Cauchy sequence can be subrecursively computed in a base-2 expansion, but. . . we cannot turn a Cauchy sequence into a base-2 expansion by subrecursive means; this requires unbounded search, that is, full Turing computability. A base-2 expansion can be subrecursively computed in a Dedekind cut, but. . . we cannot turn a base-2 expansion into a Dedekind cut by subrecursive means. This requires unbounded search, that is, full Turing computability. Thus, it makes perfectly good sense to talk about three different levels of subrecursive representability of irrational numbers: the D-level, the E -level and the C -level. For any class of functions S let SC denote the set of irrational numbers that have a Cauchy sequence in S let S2E denote the set of irrational numbers that have a base-2 expansion in S let SD denote the set of irrational numbers that have a Dedekind cut in S. Definition: A class of function is subrecursive if it is contained in an efficiently enumerable class of computable total functions. Definition: A class of function is subrecursive if it is contained in an efficiently enumerable class of computable total functions. Theorem: For any subrecursive class S which is closed under Kalmar elementary operations, we have SD ⊂ S2E ⊂ SC . Sum Approximations Any irrational number α can be written of the form α = a + 1 1 1 + k + k + ... k 0 1 2 2 22 where k0 , k1 , k2 , . . . is a strictly monotone increasing sequence of natural numbers and a is an integer. Any irrational number α can be written of the form α = a + 1 1 1 + k + k + ... k 0 1 2 2 22 where k0 , k1 , k2 , . . . is a strictly monotone increasing sequence of natural numbers and a is an integer. Any irrational number α can be written of the form α = a − 1 1 1 − k − k − ... 2k0 21 22 where k0 , k1 , k2 , . . . is a strictly monotone increasing sequence of natural numbers and a is an integer. Let A : N → N be a strictly monotone function. We will say that A is a sum approximation from below of the the real number α if there exists a ∈ Z such that α = a + ∞ X i=0 1 2A(i)+1 . Let A : N → N be a strictly monotone function. We will say that A is a sum approximation from above of the the real number α if there exists a ∈ Z such that α = a − ∞ X i=0 1 2A(i)+1 . Let S↑ denote the set of irrational numbers that have sum approximations from below in the subrecursive class S. Let S↓ denote the set of irrational numbers that have sum approximations from above in the subrecursive class S. Then, we have Let S↑ denote the set of irrational numbers that have sum approximations from below in the subrecursive class S. Let S↓ denote the set of irrational numbers that have sum approximations from above in the subrecursive class S. Then, we have S↑ 6⊆ S↓ and S↓ 6⊆ S↑ . Let S↑ denote the set of irrational numbers that have sum approximations from below in the subrecursive class S. Let S↓ denote the set of irrational numbers that have sum approximations from above in the subrecursive class S. Then, we have S↑ 6⊆ S↓ and S↓ 6⊆ S↑ . To put it slightly different: the ↑-level and the ↓-level are incomparable levels. Note that it follows that S↑ ⊂ S2E (strict inclusions). and S↓ ⊂ S2E Note that it follows that S↑ ⊂ S2E and S↓ ⊂ S2E and S↓ ⊆ S2E . (strict inclusions). It is obvious that we have S↑ ⊆ S2E and we cannot have S↑ = S2E or S↓ = S2E because that contradicts that S↑ and S↓ are incomparable. Let us discuss the proof of S↑ 6⊆ S↓ (The proof of S↓ 6⊆ S↑ is symmetric.) Note that an irrational number has one, and only one, sum approximation from below . . . Note that an irrational number has one, and only one, sum approximation from below . . . and one, and only one, sum approximation from above. Note that an irrational number has one, and only one, sum approximation from below . . . and one, and only one, sum approximation from above. Thus if  increases to fast to be in S, then α = 0 + will not be in S↑ . ∞ X 1 i=0 2Â(i)+1 Note that an irrational number has one, and only one, sum approximation from below . . . and one, and only one, sum approximation from above. Thus if  increases to fast to be in S, then α = 0 + ∞ X 1 i=0 2Â(i)+1 will not be in S↑ . But the sum approximation of α from above might very well be in S. Note that an irrational number has one, and only one, sum approximation from below . . . and one, and only one, sum approximation from above. Thus if  increases to fast to be in S, then α = 0 + ∞ X 1 i=0 2Â(i)+1 will not be in S↑ . But the sum approximation of α from above might very well be in S. Indeed, if the approximation from below is a fast-growing function, the approximation from above will be a slow-growing function. Let α = 0 + ∞ X 1 i=0 2Â(i)+1 = 1 − ∞ X 1 i=0 2Ǎ(i)+1 . Let α = 0 + If ∞ X 1 i=0 2Â(i)+1 = 1 − ∞ X 1 i=0 2Ǎ(i)+1 1 1 1 1 + 5 + 17 + 100 + . . . 3 2 2 2 2 is the approximation from below, then α = 0 + . Let α = 0 + ∞ X 1 i=0 2Â(i)+1 = 1 − ∞ X 1 i=0 2Ǎ(i)+1 . If 1 1 1 1 + 5 + 17 + 100 + . . . 3 2 2 2 2 is the approximation from below, then α = 0 + α = 1− 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 − 2 − 4 − 6 − 7 − 8 − 9 − ... 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 is the approximation from above. Let α = 0 + ∞ X 1 i=0 2Â(i)+1 = 1 − ∞ X 1 i=0 2Ǎ(i)+1 . If 1 1 1 1 + 5 + 17 + 100 + . . . 3 2 2 2 2 is the approximation from below, then α = 0 + α = 1− 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 − 2 − 4 − 6 − 7 − 8 − 9 − ... 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 is the approximation from above. In general rng(Ǎ) = N \ rng(Â) . Let S be an subrecursive class closed under Kalmar elementary operations. Let S be an subrecursive class closed under Kalmar elementary operations. Let f be an honest function that increases to fast to be in S. Let S be an subrecursive class closed under Kalmar elementary operations. Let f be an honest function that increases to fast to be in S. Let α = 0 + ∞ X i=0 Then 1 2f (i)+1 . Let S be an subrecursive class closed under Kalmar elementary operations. Let f be an honest function that increases to fast to be in S. Let α = 0 + ∞ X i=0 1 2f (i)+1 . Then α does not have a sum approximation from below in S Let S be an subrecursive class closed under Kalmar elementary operations. Let f be an honest function that increases to fast to be in S. Let α = 0 + ∞ X i=0 1 2f (i)+1 . Then α does not have a sum approximation from below in S α has a sum approximation from above in S Let S be an subrecursive class closed under Kalmar elementary operations. Let f be an honest function that increases to fast to be in S. Let α = 0 + ∞ X i=0 1 2f (i)+1 . Then α does not have a sum approximation from below in S α has a sum approximation from above in S moreover, the Dedekind cut of α is in S. Thus, we conclude that S↑ 6⊆ S↓ and S↑ 6⊆ SD . Thus, we conclude that S↑ 6⊆ S↓ and S↑ 6⊆ SD . and S↓ 6⊆ SD . A symmetric argument yields S↓ 6⊆ S↑ Moreover, by diagonalisation, we can construct α, β and γ such that α, β, γ 6∈ SD and α ∈ S↑ ∩ S↓ β ∈ S↑ \ S↓ γ ∈ S↓ \ S↑ . Moreover, by diagonalisation, we can construct α, β and γ such that α, β, γ 6∈ SD and α ∈ S↑ ∩ S↓ β ∈ S↑ \ S↓ γ ∈ S↓ \ S↑ . The constructions of the three numbers are similar, and I would say that they all are standard diagonalisation constructions. Moreover, by diagonalisation, we can construct α, β and γ such that α, β, γ 6∈ SD and α ∈ S↑ ∩ S↓ β ∈ S↑ \ S↓ γ ∈ S↓ \ S↑ . The constructions of the three numbers are similar, and I would say that they all are standard diagonalisation constructions. Let us look at a Venn diagram. VENN DIAGRAM I Sum Approximations in Different Bases The sum approximations discussed above can be considered as sum approximations in base 2. The sum approximations discussed above can be considered as sum approximations in base 2. In general, we can sum-approximate irrational numbers α in any base b ≥ 2. The sum approximations discussed above can be considered as sum approximations in base 2. In general, we can sum-approximate irrational numbers α in any base b ≥ 2. We can write an irrational number α of the form α = a + d0 d1 d2 + k + k + ... b k0 b 1 b 2 (from below) where k0 , k1 , k2 , . . . is a strictly monotone increasing sequence of natural numbers and a is an integer and di ∈ {1, . . . , b − 1}. and of the form α = a − d0 d1 d2 − k − k − ... k 0 1 b b b 2 (from above) where k0 , k1 , k2 , . . . is a strictly monotone increasing sequence of natural numbers and a is an integer and di ∈ {1, . . . , b − 1}. The computational complexity of a sum approximation depends significantly on the base. The computational complexity of a sum approximation depends significantly on the base. For natural numbers a, b ≥ 2, we define the relation by ab ⇔ every factor of a is also a factor of b . The computational complexity of a sum approximation depends significantly on the base. For natural numbers a, b ≥ 2, we define the relation by ab ⇔ every factor of a is also a factor of b . Let Sb↑ denote the set of irrational numbers that have a base-b sum approximation (from below) in the subrecursive class S. The computational complexity of a sum approximation depends significantly on the base. For natural numbers a, b ≥ 2, we define the relation by ab ⇔ every factor of a is also a factor of b . Let Sb↑ denote the set of irrational numbers that have a base-b sum approximation (from below) in the subrecursive class S. For any S closed under primitive recursive operations we have ab ⇔ Sb↑ ⊆ Sa↑ . Thus we have, e.g. S2↑ 6⊆ S3↓ and S3↓ 6⊆ S2↑ S10↑ ⊂ S2↑ Thus we have, e.g. S2↑ 6⊆ S3↓ and S3↓ 6⊆ S2↑ S10↑ ⊂ S2↑ S6↑ ⊆ S2↑ ∩ S3↑ Thus we have, e.g. S2↑ 6⊆ S3↓ and S3↓ 6⊆ S2↑ S10↑ ⊂ S2↑ S6↑ ⊆ S2↑ ∩ S3↑ S2↑ = S4↑ = S8↑ = . . . = S2n ↑ = . . . The corresponding equivalence holds for base-b expansions: Let SbE denote the set of irrational numbers that have a base-b expansion in S. For any S closed under elementary operations we have a b ⇔ SbE ⊆ SaE . The corresponding equivalence holds for base-b expansions: Let SbE denote the set of irrational numbers that have a base-b expansion in S. For any S closed under elementary operations we have a b ⇔ SbE ⊆ SaE . The implication from left-right was proved in a paper of Mostowski (1957). The right-left implication is posed as an open problem in the same paper. General Sum Approximations The formal definition of a general sum approximation may be hard to digest, but it is really straightforward . . . here it comes: Let G : N × N → Q be such that, for each b > 1, we have G (b, i) = di b ki where di ∈ {1, . . . , b − 1} and ki ∈ N and 0 < ki < ki+1 (for all i ∈ N). Let G : N × N → Q be such that, for each b > 1, we have G (b, i) = di b ki where di ∈ {1, . . . , b − 1} and ki ∈ N and 0 < ki < ki+1 (for all i ∈ N). We say that G is a general sum approximation from below of the the real number α if there exists a ∈ Z such that for all b > 1 we have ∞ X α = a + G (b, i) . i=0 Let G : N × N → Q be such that, for each b > 1, we have G (b, i) = di b ki where di ∈ {1, . . . , b − 1} and ki ∈ N and 0 < ki < ki+1 (for all i ∈ N). We say that G is a general sum approximation from above of the real number α if there exists a ∈ Z such that for all b > 1 we have α = a − ∞ X i=0 G (b, i) . Example π = 3.14159265358979323846264 . . . Example π = 3.14159265358979323846264 . . . Let Ĝ be the sum approximation of π from below. Example π = 3.14159265358979323846264 . . . Let Ĝ be the sum approximation of π from below. Then, we have π = 3 = 3 + Ĝ (10, 0) 1 + 1 10 + Ĝ (10, 1) 4 + 2 10 + Ĝ (10, 2) 1 + 3 10 + ... + ... Example π = 3.14159265358979323846264 . . . Let Ĝ be the sum approximation of π from below. Then, we have π = 3 = 3 + Ĝ (10, 0) 1 + 1 10 + Ĝ (10, 1) 4 + 2 10 + Ĝ (10, 2) 1 + 3 10 Let Ǧ be the sum approximation of π from above. + ... + ... Example π = 3.14159265358979323846264 . . . Let Ĝ be the sum approximation of π from below. Then, we have π = 3 = 3 + Ĝ (10, 0) 1 + 1 10 + Ĝ (10, 1) 4 + 2 10 + Ĝ (10, 2) 1 + 3 10 + ... + ... Let Ǧ be the sum approximation of π from above. Then, we have π = 4 = 4 − Ǧ (10, 0) 8 − 1 10 − Ǧ (10, 1) 5 − 2 10 − Ǧ (10, 2) 8 − 3 10 − ... − ... Then, Sg ↑ denotes the set of irrationals that have a general sum approximation from below in the subrecursive class S. Then, Sg ↓ denotes the set of irrationals that have a general sum approximation from above in the subrecursive class S. Then, Sg ↑ denotes the set of irrationals that have a general sum approximation from below in the subrecursive class S. Then, Sg ↓ denotes the set of irrationals that have a general sum approximation from above in the subrecursive class S. For any S (closed under elementary operations) and any base b, we obviously have It is obvious that we have Sg ↓ ⊆ Sb↓ and Sg ↑ ⊆ Sb↑ . Then, Sg ↑ denotes the set of irrationals that have a general sum approximation from below in the subrecursive class S. Then, Sg ↓ denotes the set of irrationals that have a general sum approximation from above in the subrecursive class S. For any S (closed under elementary operations) and any base b, we obviously have It is obvious that we have Sg ↓ ⊆ Sb↓ and Sg ↑ ⊆ Sb↑ . and Sg ↑ ⊂ Sb↑ Moreover, we have Sg ↓ ⊂ Sb↓ since e.g. S2↓ and S3↓ are incomparable. Furthermore, it is not very hard to prove that we have Sg ↓ ⊆ SD and Sg ↑ ⊆ SD for any S closed under elementary operations. Furthermore, it is not very hard to prove that we have Sg ↓ ⊆ SD and Sg ↑ ⊆ SD for any S closed under elementary operations. But I had to work hard to prove that for any S closed under primitive recursion, we have Sg ↓ ∩ Sg ↑ = S[ ] where S[ ] is the set of irrational numbers that have a continues fraction in S. I expect that Sg ↓ 6= Sg ↑ but I have no proof (yet). I expect that Sg ↓ 6= Sg ↑ but I have no proof (yet). The next Venn diagram gives a summary. VENN DIAGRAM II There is a lot of open problem present. The following one seems particularly challenging: There is a lot of open problem present. The following one seems particularly challenging: Does the equality ∞ \ b=2 hold? Sb↑ = Sg ↑ There is a lot of open problem present. The following one seems particularly challenging: Does the equality ∞ \ Sb↑ = Sg ↑ b=2 hold? Does it hold when S is closed under primitive recursion? Does it hold when S is closed elementary operations, but not under primitive recursion? The corresponding equality for base-b expansions does not hold. This was proved by Lehman, Fundamenta Mathematica 1961 (Mostowski asks if the equality holds in Fundamenta Mathematica 1957). Lehman applies a result from analytic number theory in his proof. Some relevant papers: L. Kristiansen: On Subrecursive Representability of Irrational Numbers, Computability (the journal of CiE, preprint available from my homepage). E. Specker: Nicht Konstruktiv Beweisbare Satze Der Analysis, The Journal of Symbolic Logic 14(3) (1949), 145–158. A. Mostowski: On Computable Sequences, Fundamenta Mathematica 44 (1957), 37–51. R. S. Lehman: On Primitive Recursive Real Numbers, Fundamenta Mathematica 49 (1961), 105–118. K. Ko: On the definitions of some complexity classes of real numbers, Mathematical Systems Theory 16 (1983), 95–109 Goodbye! Thanks for your attention!