Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
As for definition (5), the additive property together with the complex derivative ′ = are sufficient to guarantee () =. However, the initial value condition f ( 1 ) = e {\displaystyle f(1)=e} together with the other regularity conditions are not sufficient.
This "conceptual" definition requires a uniqueness proof and an existence proof, but it allows an easy derivation of the main properties of the exponential function. Uniqueness: If f ( x ) {\displaystyle f(x)} and g ( x ) {\displaystyle g(x)} are two functions satisfying the above definition, then the derivative of f / g ...
This is a list of limits for common functions such as elementary functions. In this article, the terms a, b and c are constants with respect to x.
Exponential utility implies constant absolute risk aversion (CARA), with coefficient of absolute risk aversion equal to a constant: ″ ′ =. In the standard model of one risky asset and one risk-free asset, [1] [2] for example, this feature implies that the optimal holding of the risky asset is independent of the level of initial wealth; thus on the margin any additional wealth would be ...
The matrix exponential satisfies the following properties. [2] We begin with the properties that are immediate consequences of the definition as a power series: e 0 = I; exp(X T) = (exp X) T, where X T denotes the transpose of X. exp(X ∗) = (exp X) ∗, where X ∗ denotes the conjugate transpose of X. If Y is invertible then e YXY −1 = Ye ...
The definition of limit given here does not depend on how (or whether) f is defined at p. Bartle [9] refers to this as a deleted limit, because it excludes the value of f at p. The corresponding non-deleted limit does depend on the value of f at p, if p is in the domain of f. Let : be a real-valued function.
The original proof is based on the Taylor series expansions of the exponential function e z (where z is a complex number) and of sin x and cos x for real numbers x . In fact, the same proof shows that Euler's formula is even valid for all complex numbers x .
This definition of exponentiation with negative exponents is the only one that allows extending the identity + = to negative exponents (consider the case =). The same definition applies to invertible elements in a multiplicative monoid , that is, an algebraic structure , with an associative multiplication and a multiplicative identity denoted 1 ...