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 ) (x : ) : summable (λ k, (power_series.coeff  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 θ\theta. 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 θ\theta 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 θθ should be easy to compute. (But for general θx\theta_x 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 rr be a positive real number less than 11 and let xx be a non-zero complex number of absolute value at most rr. Then there is an fZ{t}f \in \mathbb{Z}\{t\} congruent to 1 modulo tt which vanishes to order 11 at xx and its complex conjugate, and vanishes nowhere else in the disc tr\vert t \vert \leq r.

Filippo A. E. Nuccio (Nov 09 2021 at 21:08):

(Of course, I was neglecting the "complex conj" business, working with real xx)

Johan Commelin (Nov 09 2021 at 21:09):

Right. But we only need the case x=12x = \frac12.

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 ξ=12\xi=\frac{1}{2} 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 1/21/2

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 xx. That was really nice!


Last updated: Dec 20 2023 at 11:08 UTC