E.P.
Reputation
1,010
Next privilege 2,000 Rep.
 Feb 29 revised A simple test for degenerate eigenvalues of a holomorphic matrix-valued function? added 27 characters in body Feb 3 comment Can't understand this question related to arithmetic progression. So there you have it: you need to ask your teacher. The progression is definitely not arithmetic. Feb 3 answered Can't understand this question related to arithmetic progression. Jan 21 awarded Necromancer Jan 21 revised Exponential integral $\int_0^\infty \frac{x^t}{\Gamma(t+1)}\text dt$ edited body Jan 21 revised Exponential integral $\int_0^\infty \frac{x^t}{\Gamma(t+1)}\text dt$ deleted 19 characters in body Jan 21 awarded Revival Jan 21 answered Exponential integral $\int_0^\infty \frac{x^t}{\Gamma(t+1)}\text dt$ Oct 22 comment Is $\sum_n\exp(ian+ibn^2+icn^3)$ known in terms of anything else? @tired I'm mainly interested in exact results. However, any handles on this series would be useful. Oct 22 awarded Curious Oct 21 revised Is $\sum_n\exp(ian+ibn^2+icn^3)$ known in terms of anything else? added 145 characters in body Oct 21 comment Is $\sum_n\exp(ian+ibn^2+icn^3)$ known in terms of anything else? @Paul I might need to get on the physicist-looking-for-low-hanging-fruit queue, then. Oct 21 asked Is $\sum_n\exp(ian+ibn^2+icn^3)$ known in terms of anything else? Oct 16 comment Indefinite Bessel integrals Oof, yeah, that's definitely doable. I was hoping for something a bit more packaged up. Thanks, though. (Note that MathJax also accepts \begin{align} constructs which look slightly better.) Oct 12 asked Indefinite Bessel integrals Oct 5 awarded Popular Question Sep 24 answered Approximation to series for quantum harmonic oscillator Jun 23 comment Approximating dirac delta function with sinc functions @MattRosenzweig I don't really have time to address this but if you have a fix you're welcome to implement it. May 8 awarded Yearling May 5 comment Positive and negative complex numbers? In fact, engineers have taken this to the extreme of saying that $j=-i$ is the real square root of -1, and changed all their formulas accordingly. (Well, sort of. They care mostly about time dependence, so they prefer the form $e^{j\omega t}$, whereas spatially-minded physicists prefer $e^{i(kz-\omega t)}$ for plane waves. And they feel $i$ is an appropriate symbol for current, so they shifted over to $j$. They assure me it makes sense.) Whatever the reasons, there are large stretches of physics vs engineering formula mismatches which are magically fixed by setting $j=-i$.