Thread replies: 14
Thread images: 3
Thread images: 3
Imnot Arobot
How Do I Graph This Function?? 2016-12-30 08:23:13 Post No. 8570587
[Report] Image search: [Google]
How Do I Graph This Function?? 2016-12-30 08:23:13 Post No. 8570587
[Report] Image search: [Google]
File: firework.png (10KB, 250x250px) Image search:
[Google]
10KB, 250x250px
I know this function F(x) converges,
because terms of [math]e^x[/math] converge,
and [math]L_n(x)[/math] is decreasing, duh
but how do I graph this doggie?
[math]\displaystyle F(x)= \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty}F_n(x)=e^{-x}[L_1(x)+xL_2(x)+\frac{x^2}{2!}L_3(x)+ \cdots+\frac{x^n}{n!}L_{n+1}(x)][/math]
where [math]n \epsilon \mathbb{N}[/math]
and [math]x \geq 0[/math]
and [math]L_0(x)=x[/math]
and [math]L_n(x)= \ln(L_{n-1}(x)+1)[/math]
>>
missed it by *that* much
[math]n \epsilon \mathbb{N}[/math]
>>
File: Screen Shot 2016-12-30 at 10.16.20.png (74KB, 563x747px) Image search:
[Google]
74KB, 563x747px
>>
File: Screen Shot 2016-12-30 at 10.17.38.png (86KB, 675x736px) Image search:
[Google]
86KB, 675x736px
>>
>>
>>8570647
>...and those graphs are totally whack.
No they're not.
>>
>>8570649
>No they're not.
>they're not, they're not, they're not
Yes, they are.
>>
>>8570647
I don't get your x >= 0 question.
>>
>>
>>8570938
>I don't get your x >= 0
ftfo fgt pls
>>
>>8570683
Bahahaha "they are" is correct. Stick to math, correct people's english clearly isn't your thing
>>
>>8570948
>Anonymous 12/30/16(Fri)15:23:22 No.857
It's okay. But are there any alternatives? I was thinking of learning SAGE but would like to know about the alternatives.
>>
>>8570647
took me a while to figure them out,
looks a bit like the graph of
[math]xe^{-x}[/math]
thanks
>>
>>8572780
wat
Thread posts: 14
Thread images: 3
Thread images: 3