Jump to content

Jacobi theta functions (notational variations): Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
improve
Yobot (talk | contribs)
m clean up /fixed checkwiki error 18 using AWB (8717)
Line 7: Line 7:
\vartheta_{00}(z, q) = \sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty q^{n^2} \exp (2 \pi i n z)
\vartheta_{00}(z, q) = \sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty q^{n^2} \exp (2 \pi i n z)
</math>
</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 33: Line 33:
* 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)''
* 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:Theta functions| ]]
[[Category:elliptic functions]]
[[Category:Elliptic functions]]

Revision as of 15:17, 1 December 2012

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

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

  • Milton Abramowitz and Irene A. Stegun, Handbook of Mathematical Functions, (1964) Dover Publications, New York. ISBN 0-486-61272-4. (See section 16.27ff.)
  • 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 θ functions)