Talk:Exponential function

message: Sometimes there's exp(z), sometimes there's exp z. Shouldn't an article be consistent with itself?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by A1E6 (talk • contribs) 17:57, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: For the most part, yes.  MOS:MATH#Multi-letter names touches briefly on this, but is certainly not definitive.  Personally, I think having parentheses for standard functions like , , etc. tends to clutter, especially when there are parens around the whole term for one reason or another.  However, having looked over quite a few math articles, my general feeling is that there are a lot (although I wouldn't automatically say most, or even a majority) of editors who include them.  I'm not sure if this is because it's just their preference, or because they think it's required, or maybe for other reasons.  Anyway, I'd be in favor of removing them when they're not necessary.  For example, it would be necessary in an expression like \exp(x+y), but not in \exp x, or even something like \exp ix.  –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 19:41, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parentheses 

message: The equations y = e^(-kx) and y = 1-e^(-kx) are extremely common in engineering and physics, but I can't find a non-specific name for k or 1/k. In electronics 1/k is a time constant like "the RC time constant".  In physics k can be called attenuation coefficient and 1/k can be the attenuation length. If you change e to 2, 1/k it is called the half-life.  I think I've seen 1/k called the expected or mean life, time, or distance.  Can someone think of what it is supposed to be called and include it in this article? 1/k is the "expected value" but that's too general.  Ywaz (talk) 12:56, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I have documented this in this article and also in Exponential decay.—Anita5192 (talk) 19:47, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extinction coefficient? 

message: For example, using the definition \exp x = \lim_{n\to\infty}\left(1 + \frac{x}{n}\right)^{n} and \exp y = \lim_{n\to\infty}\left(1 + \frac{y}{n}\right)^{n},
:\begin{align} \exp x \cdot \exp y &= \lim_{n\to\infty}\left(1 + \frac{x}{n}\right)^{n} \cdot \lim_{n\to\infty}\left(1 + \frac{y}{n}\right)^{n}\\
&= \lim_{n\to\infty}\left[\left(1 + \frac{x}{n}\right)^{n} \left(1 + \frac{y}{n}\right)^{n}\right]\\
&= \lim_{n\to\infty}\left[\left(1 + \frac{x}{n}\right) \left(1 + \frac{y}{n}\right)\right]^n\\
&= \lim_{n\to\infty}\left(1 + \frac{x+y}{n} + \frac{xy}{n^2}\right)^{n}\\
&= \lim_{n\to\infty}\sum_{k=0}^n \binom nk \left(1 + \frac{x+y}{n}\right)^{n-k}\left(\frac{xy}{n^2}\right)^k \text{(Binomial theorem)}\\
&= \lim_{n\to\infty}\left[\left(1 + \frac{x+y}{n}\right)^n + \binom n1 \left(1 + \frac{x+y}{n}\right)^{n-1}\left(\frac{xy}{n^2}\right) + \binom n2 \left(1 + \frac{x+y}{n}\right)^{n-2}\left(\frac{xy}{n^2}\right)^2 + ...\right]\\
&= \lim_{n\to\infty}\left(1 + \frac{x+y}{n}\right)^n + \lim_{n\to\infty}\left[\binom n1 \left(1 + \frac{x+y}{n}\right)^{n-1}\left(\frac{xy}{n^2}\right) + \binom n2 \left(1 + \frac{x+y}{n}\right)^{n-2}\left(\frac{xy}{n^2}\right)^2 + ...\right]\\
&= \lim_{n\to\infty}\left(1 + \frac{x+y}{n}\right)^n + \lim_{n\to\infty}\left(\frac{xy}{n^2}\right)\left[\binom n1 \left(1 + \frac{x+y}{n}\right)^{n-1} + \binom n2 \left(1 + \frac{x+y}{n}\right)^{n-2}\left(\frac{xy}{n^2}\right) + ...\right]\\
&= \exp(x + y) + 0 \text{ (as} \lim_{n\to\infty}\frac{xy}{n^2} = 0) \\
&= \exp(x + y) \\
\end{align}
49.147.83.13 (talk) 16:21, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, this proof in not useful without a proof of the equivalence of the definitions. If one has the equivalence, one can use the definition through derivatives: The derivative with respect to  of e^{x+y}/e^y shows that this function is equal to its derivative, and equals 1 for ; thus, it equals e^x for every . The proof takes only two lines and explains better why the identity is true. So, your proof is definitively not useful, except as an exercise for students. D.Lazard (talk) 16:55, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

text: Your proof is also incorrect (although fixable) and omits a couple things even still.  I leave it as an exercise to determine where the mistake is, and also as a cautionary tale about coming up with your own proofs rather than adapting ones from existing sources. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 17:05, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correction to my edit to the Overview section that got reverted (Forgot the binomial coefficients) 

message: A function is exponential when it shows behaviour:
f(a + b) = f(a) * f(b)
Examples are "e^x", cosine and sine, selection of Taylor series.--86.83.108.100 (talk) 12:58, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Cosine and sine do not satisfy that identity, you may be thinking of the complex exponential, which can be expressed in terms of cosine and sine. Furthermore, a function is exponential if it is proportional to its rate of growth, so your equation is missing a constant factor. Student298 (talk) 20:50, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exponential behaviour 

message: I think to improve coverage the article should have some discussion about branches. Maybe the exponential function as commonly defined is only one branch, but several related functions are inescapably branched and in some contexts it's convenient to consider the exponential function as a branched function as well. The article only vaguely hints at the branching behaviour and only if you already knew what to look for when you started reading (search for ‘multivalued’).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.61.180.106 (talk) 01:05, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that that you call "branching" is the study of multivalued functions near their singularities. As the exponential function is an entire function, there is no singularity, and no branching. This is not the case for functions a^x=e^{x\ln a}, when  is not real and positive. This case is considered in Exponentiation, as said in the hatnote at the top of the article. D.Lazard (talk) 10:11, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Branches 

message: In my opinion, there is an implication that all functions of the form ab^x satisfy the identity f(x+y)=f(x)f(y). Obviously this is not true, but I wonder then how we should introduce these exponential functions. Student298 (talk) 20:32, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistency in the lead 

message: — Assignment last updated by Ahlluhn (talk) 00:57, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: 4A Wikipedia Assignment