Jump to content

Jacobi theta functions (notational variations): Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
Removing merge template; no case made; no support; target redirects elsewhere
 
(15 intermediate revisions by 14 users not shown)
Line 5: Line 5:
which is equivalent to
which is equivalent to
:<math>
:<math>
\vartheta_{00}(z, q) = \sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty q^{n^2} \exp (2 \pi i n z)
\vartheta_{00}(w, q) = \sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty q^{n^2} w^{2n}
</math>
</math>
where <math>q=e^{\pi i\tau}</math> and <math>w=e^{\pi iz}</math>.
However, a similar notation is defined somewhat differently in Whittaker and Watson, p.487:

However, a similar notation is defined somewhat differently in [[Whittaker and Watson]], p.&nbsp;487:
:<math>
:<math>
\vartheta_{0,0}(x) = \sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty q^{n^2} \exp (2 \pi i n x/a)
\vartheta_{0,0}(x) = \sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty q^{n^2} \exp (2 \pi i n x/a)
Line 15: Line 17:
\vartheta_{1,1}(x) = \sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty (-1)^n q^{(n+1/2)^2} \exp (\pi i (2 n + 1) x/a)
\vartheta_{1,1}(x) = \sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty (-1)^n q^{(n+1/2)^2} \exp (\pi i (2 n + 1) x/a)
</math>
</math>
This is a factor of ''i'' off from the definition of <math>\vartheta_{11}</math> as defined in the Wikipedia article. These definitions can be made at least proportional by x = za, but other definitions cannot. Whittaker and Watson, Abramowitz and Stegun, and Gradshteyn and Ryzhik all follow Tannery and Molk, in which
This is a factor of ''i'' off from the definition of <math>\vartheta_{11}</math> as defined in the Wikipedia article. These definitions can be made at least proportional by ''x'' = ''za'', but other definitions cannot. Whittaker and Watson, Abramowitz and Stegun, and Gradshteyn and Ryzhik all follow Tannery and Molk, in which
:<math>
:<math>
\vartheta_1(z) = -i \sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty (-1)^n q^{(n+1/2)^2} \exp ((2 n + 1) z)</math>
\vartheta_1(z) = -i \sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty (-1)^n q^{(n+1/2)^2} \exp ((2 n + 1) i z)</math>
:<math>
:<math>
\vartheta_2(z) = \sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty q^{(n+1/2)^2} \exp ((2 n + 1) z)</math>
\vartheta_2(z) = \sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty q^{(n+1/2)^2} \exp ((2 n + 1) i z)</math>
:<math>
:<math>
\vartheta_3(z) = \sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty q^{n^2} \exp (2 n z)</math>
\vartheta_3(z) = \sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty q^{n^2} \exp (2 n i z)</math>
:<math>
:<math>
\vartheta_4(z) = \sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty (-1)^n q^{n^2} \exp (2 n z)</math>
\vartheta_4(z) = \sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty (-1)^n q^{n^2} \exp (2 n i z)</math>


Note that there is no factor of π in the argument as in the previous definitions.
Note that there is no factor of π in the argument as in the previous definitions.


Whittaker and Watson refer to still other definitions of <math>\vartheta_j</math>. The warning in Abramowitz and Stegun, "There is a bewildering variety of notations...in consulting books caution should be exercised," may be viewed as an understatement. In any expression, an occurence of <math>\vartheta(z)</math> should not be assumed to have any particular definition. It is incumbent upon the author to state what definition of <math>\vartheta(z)</math> is intended.
Whittaker and Watson refer to still other definitions of <math>\vartheta_j</math>. The warning in Abramowitz and Stegun, "There is a bewildering variety of notations...in consulting books caution should be exercised," may be viewed as an understatement. In any expression, an occurrence of <math>\vartheta(z)</math> should not be assumed to have any particular definition. It is incumbent upon the author to state what definition of <math>\vartheta(z)</math> is intended.


==References==
==References==
* {{AS ref|16.27ff.}}
* Milton Abramowitz and Irene A. Stegun, ''[[Handbook of Mathematical Functions]]'', (1964) Dover Publications, New York. ISBN 0-486-61272-4. ''(See section 16.27ff.)''
* {{cite book |title=Table of Integrals, Series, and Products |author-first1=Izrail Solomonovich |author-last1=Gradshteyn |author-link1=Izrail Solomonovich Gradshteyn |author-first2=Iosif Moiseevich |author-last2=Ryzhik |author-link2=Iosif Moiseevich Ryzhik |author-first3=Yuri Veniaminovich |author-last3=Geronimus |author-link3=Yuri Veniaminovich Geronimus |author-first4=Michail Yulyevich |author-last4=Tseytlin |author-link4=Michail Yulyevich Tseytlin |editor-first1=Alan |editor-last1=Jeffrey |translator=Scripta Technica, Inc. |date=1980 |edition=4th corrected and enlarged |language=English |publisher=[[Academic Press, Inc.]] |isbn=0-12-294760-6 |lccn=79027143 <!-- |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=F7jiBQAAQBAJ |access-date=2016-02-21 --> |title-link=Gradshteyn and Ryzhik |chapter=8.18.}}
* I. S. Gradshteyn and I. M. Ryzhik, ''Table of Integrals, Functions, and Products'', (1980) Academic Press, London. ISBN 0-12-294760-6. ''(See section 8.18)''
* [[E. T. Whittaker]] and [[G. N. Watson]], ''A Course in Modern Analysis'', fourth edition, Cambridge University Press, 1927. ''(See chapter XXI for the history of Jacobi's &theta; functions)''
* [[E. T. Whittaker]] and [[G. N. Watson]], ''[[A Course in Modern Analysis]]'', fourth edition, Cambridge University Press, 1927. ''(See chapter XXI for the history of Jacobi's &theta; functions)''

[[Category:Theta functions]]
[[Category:Elliptic functions]]

Latest revision as of 22:11, 2 October 2024

There are a number of notational systems for the Jacobi theta functions. The notations given in the Wikipedia article define the original function

which is equivalent to

where and .

However, a similar notation is defined somewhat differently in Whittaker and Watson, p. 487:

This notation is attributed to "Hermite, H.J.S. Smith and some other mathematicians". They also define

This is a factor of i off from the definition of as defined in the Wikipedia article. These definitions can be made at least proportional by x = za, but other definitions cannot. Whittaker and Watson, Abramowitz and Stegun, and Gradshteyn and Ryzhik all follow Tannery and Molk, in which

Note that there is no factor of π in the argument as in the previous definitions.

Whittaker and Watson refer to still other definitions of . The warning in Abramowitz and Stegun, "There is a bewildering variety of notations...in consulting books caution should be exercised," may be viewed as an understatement. In any expression, an occurrence of should not be assumed to have any particular definition. It is incumbent upon the author to state what definition of is intended.

References

[edit]
  • Abramowitz, Milton; Stegun, Irene Ann, eds. (1983) [June 1964]. "Chapter 16.27ff.". Handbook of Mathematical Functions with Formulas, Graphs, and Mathematical Tables. Applied Mathematics Series. Vol. 55 (Ninth reprint with additional corrections of tenth original printing with corrections (December 1972); first ed.). Washington D.C.; New York: United States Department of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards; Dover Publications. ISBN 978-0-486-61272-0. LCCN 64-60036. MR 0167642. LCCN 65-12253.
  • Gradshteyn, Izrail Solomonovich; Ryzhik, Iosif Moiseevich; Geronimus, Yuri Veniaminovich; Tseytlin, Michail Yulyevich (1980). "8.18.". In Jeffrey, Alan (ed.). Table of Integrals, Series, and Products. Translated by Scripta Technica, Inc. (4th corrected and enlarged ed.). Academic Press, Inc. ISBN 0-12-294760-6. LCCN 79027143.
  • E. T. Whittaker and G. N. Watson, A Course in Modern Analysis, fourth edition, Cambridge University Press, 1927. (See chapter XXI for the history of Jacobi's θ functions)