Zulip Chat Archive
Stream: maths
Topic: convergence of a power series
Filippo A. E. Nuccio (Nov 09 2021 at 16:20):
Is there a nice way to say that a power series (say, with real coefficients) converges at a point x : ℝ
? What I could come up with is
def conv_blah (f : power_series ℝ) (x : ℝ) : summable (λ k, (power_series.coeff ℝ k f) * x ^ k) :=
because I was unable to find a clearer "evaluation" operator. But I suspect that this should already be in mathlib
as part of the API for power_series
.
Johan Commelin (Nov 09 2021 at 16:55):
No, I don't think it's there yet.
Johan Commelin (Nov 09 2021 at 16:56):
power_series
is completely algebraic for now
Johan Commelin (Nov 09 2021 at 16:58):
But connecting it to the analytic world should be done at some point
Johan Commelin (Nov 09 2021 at 16:59):
Do you want this for LTE?
Heather Macbeth (Nov 09 2021 at 17:57):
There is docs#formal_multilinear_series.radius, etc -- the problem is that this theory has not beeen connected to power_series
. @Yury G. Kudryashov was working on this last year but I don't know if there's been any progress lately.
Johan Commelin (Nov 09 2021 at 18:29):
(Just for the record, I'm not sure that power_series
will be useful for LTE.)
Filippo A. E. Nuccio (Nov 09 2021 at 20:08):
Thanks! I am trying to state/prove Harbater's lemma on the kernel of . I agree I could work with laurent_measures
(supported at a singleton) but it is not clear to me whether this is really an advantage. At any rate, I will try to introduce as little technology as possible beyond what is already in LTE.
Johan Commelin (Nov 09 2021 at 20:21):
But you need laurent_series
, right?
Johan Commelin (Nov 09 2021 at 20:22):
You need to allow a_{-n}
coefficients
Filippo A. E. Nuccio (Nov 09 2021 at 20:22):
Well, actually for Harbater's lemma 1.5 I don't think so (unless I have misread it).
Filippo A. E. Nuccio (Nov 09 2021 at 20:22):
His construction only needs positive nonnegative indexes.
Filippo A. E. Nuccio (Nov 09 2021 at 20:24):
Then Scholze-Clausen observe that the kernel of is generated by, for instance, that gadget. And since there are many units with negative coefficients, a generic element in the kernel will also have negative ones, but there exists a generator with positive nonnegative ones only, I think.
Johan Commelin (Nov 09 2021 at 21:05):
@Filippo A. E. Nuccio Can you copy-paste the statement of Harbater 1.5?
Filippo A. E. Nuccio (Nov 09 2021 at 21:06):
Sure (in the meanwhile, do you want to move our discussion to the LTE stream?)
Johan Commelin (Nov 09 2021 at 21:06):
In the case that we are interested in, the kernel of should be easy to compute. (But for general you need to work harder.)
Johan Commelin (Nov 09 2021 at 21:06):
Filippo A. E. Nuccio said:
Sure (in the meanwhile, do you want to move our discussion to the LTE stream?)
Ooh, we can discuss it here. Doesn't matter too much I think
Filippo A. E. Nuccio (Nov 09 2021 at 21:08):
1.5. LEMMA. Let be a positive real number less than and let be a non-zero complex number of absolute value at most . Then there is an congruent to 1 modulo which vanishes to order at and its complex conjugate, and vanishes nowhere else in the disc .
Filippo A. E. Nuccio (Nov 09 2021 at 21:08):
(Of course, I was neglecting the "complex conj" business, working with real )
Johan Commelin (Nov 09 2021 at 21:09):
Right. But we only need the case .
Johan Commelin (Nov 09 2021 at 21:09):
And then that lemma is obvious.
Filippo A. E. Nuccio (Nov 09 2021 at 21:11):
Ah, I see. This makes life easier indeed, I completely forgot that we can restrict to that case (most probably as I have never quite tried to really undestand why).
Filippo A. E. Nuccio (Nov 09 2021 at 21:11):
So, if I got it right, you are suggesting that from now on we specialize to and simplify all proofs accordingly?
Johan Commelin (Nov 09 2021 at 21:22):
Yes, for the kernel, and the corresponding short exact sequence, you only need to prove this for
Filippo A. E. Nuccio (Nov 09 2021 at 21:23):
Ok, thanks. I will then move on to simplify all statements I have pushed so far and then try to prove them.
Johan Commelin (Nov 09 2021 at 21:33):
But please keep the stuff about surjectivity for general . That was really nice!
Last updated: Dec 20 2023 at 11:08 UTC