chris
Reputation
206
Top tag
Next privilege 250 Rep.
 Mar 22 awarded Yearling Mar 22 accepted Definite integral over triple products of higher order Bessel functions. Dec 19 awarded Constituent Dec 17 comment Definite integral over triple products of higher order Bessel functions. Thank you for your answer. Dec 16 awarded Caucus May 28 comment General expression for hypergeometric function ${}_1F{}_1(p, 1, x)$ when p is an integer it seems the answer is Sum[(-x)^k/k!/(k + 1) Binomial[p, k], {k, 0, p}]==Hypergeometric1F1[-p, 2, x] May 27 comment General expression for hypergeometric function ${}_1F{}_1(p, 1, x)$ when p is an integer Ok never mind! What motivated the conjecture? May 27 comment General expression for hypergeometric function ${}_1F{}_1(p, 1, x)$ when p is an integer Would you know what Hypergeometric1F1[p, 2, x] could be? Its the only other one I need :-) May 27 comment General expression for hypergeometric function ${}_1F{}_1(p, 1, x)$ when p is an integer More generally its If[p > 0, Exp[x] LaguerreL[p - 1, -x], LaguerreL[-p, x]] for negative p to work as well. May 27 comment General expression for hypergeometric function ${}_1F{}_1(p, 1, x)$ when p is an integer Thanks so much! Its related to the spin of galaxies in large scales structures as it happens May 27 revised General expression for hypergeometric function ${}_1F{}_1(p, 1, x)$ when p is an integer deleted 18 characters in body May 27 asked General expression for hypergeometric function ${}_1F{}_1(p, 1, x)$ when p is an integer May 26 comment What is the generalization of Gauss's Theorem to a manifold? I friend of mine (whom I passed your question) tells me that the answer to your question is on p. 147 & 148 of “Geometrical methods of mathematical physics” by Bernard Schutz. Regards Apr 6 comment Perturbation theory PDEs I would argue this was not your original post. Mar 29 revised Maclaurin series and general terms minor typo in title Mar 29 suggested approved edit on Maclaurin series and general terms Mar 27 comment Perturbation theory PDEs If you apply the above procedure iteratively n times it will provide you with a solution up to order ϵ^n. What would be a converged solution in your view? Compared to a numerical solution? Mar 27 comment Perturbation theory PDEs It obeys the original equation at order ϵ^2 so that is more or less the definition of a perturbative solution. Note that the method would also work for the full blown problem of Ψ(r,t,p) it would just be more messy. Mar 27 awarded Teacher Mar 26 comment Perturbation theory PDEs @Lipschitz could you please explain to me why my answer is not answering your question?