Discussing the Near Step Function for γ=0.4823241136337762

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on the near step function defined by the equation involving gamma equal to 0.4823241136337762, which approaches 1 for |x|>1 and nearly zero for |x|<0.3. Participants analyze the function's behavior at various x values, noting its rapid convergence to a step-like function as x increases. A simplification of the function is proposed, substituting gamma with alpha, although some argue this does not significantly simplify the expression. The conversation highlights the limited range of values for gamma and alpha to maintain the function's real-number properties, emphasizing the importance of proper parameter selection. Overall, the thread delves into the mathematical intricacies and implications of the near step function.
AntonVrba
Messages
92
Reaction score
0
I would like to invite comment to the near step function below.

<br /> \Mvariable{step(x)}=\frac{{e^{-\frac{\gamma }{{x^2}}}}}{{\sqrt{1-\frac{{e^{-\frac{\gamma }{{x^2}}}}}{{x^2}}}}}<br />

the above function evaluates to nearly 1 for |x|>1 and nearly zero for |x|<0.3

for gamma = 0.4823241136337762 I have attached the plots of step and 1-step

here are some spot values for
x and step(x)
0.05 1.15E-83
0.1 1.84E-21
0.2 6.55E-6
0.3 5.11E-3
0.4 6.11E-2
0.5 2.32E-1
0.6 0.518
0.8 0.932
1.0 1.0068
2.0 1.006
5.0 1.00092
10 1.00022
50 1.0000090
 

Attachments

  • step.gif
    step.gif
    2.6 KB · Views: 522
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Indeed. If you change all the x^2s to x^4s (or x^{1000}s), then it'll get even closer to a step function.
 
I just noticed that the step function can be simplified even more
<br /> \Mvariable{step}(x)=<br /> \frac{{e^{-\frac{\gamma }{{x^2}}}}}{{\sqrt{1-\frac{{e^{-\frac{\gamma }{{x^2}}}}}{{x^2}}}}}<br /> <br /> =\frac{{{\alpha}^{\frac{1}{{x^2}}}}}{{\sqrt{1-\frac{{{\alpha}^{\frac{1}{{x^2}}}}}{{x^2}}}}}\\<br />

for above gamma= 0.4823241136337762 , alpha =0.61734693877551, hence

<br /> \Mvariable{step}(x)=<br /> \frac{{{0.61734693877551}^{\frac{1}{{x^2}}}}}{{\sqrt{1-\frac{{{0.61734693877551}^{\frac{1}{{x^2}}}}}{{x^2}}}}}\\<br />
 
Well, it's not really "simpler." You have the same number of arbitrary constants, though I guess you have a couple fewer symbols in general (you got rid of two minus signs - but you could do that just by specifying that \gamma must be negative). I'd usually just leave it in the exponential form, but that's a subjective choice based on the fact that I like the letter e :wink:
 
Data said:
Well, it's not really "simpler." You have the same number of arbitrary constants, QUOTE]


:eek: arbitrary :eek:
just play with the function and you will see that gamma or alpha has a rather very limited range for the function not to become complex for any real number:biggrin:

By proper choice of the Alpha you can make the function overshoot (become slightly larger than one) as in the example given, or the function always remaining slightly less than one i.e approach one at infinity, and that in a only very limitted range of values.
 
Last edited:
arbitrary within a certain domain is what I should have said, of course. In this case, you need \gamma &gt; 1/e.
 
I am studying the mathematical formalism behind non-commutative geometry approach to quantum gravity. I was reading about Hopf algebras and their Drinfeld twist with a specific example of the Moyal-Weyl twist defined as F=exp(-iλ/2θ^(μν)∂_μ⊗∂_ν) where λ is a constant parametar and θ antisymmetric constant tensor. {∂_μ} is the basis of the tangent vector space over the underlying spacetime Now, from my understanding the enveloping algebra which appears in the definition of the Hopf algebra...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K