The Existence of the Exponential Function

From Drorbn
Revision as of 20:01, 29 January 2007 by Drorbn (talk | contribs) (→‎The Scheme)
Jump to navigationJump to search

Introduction

The purpose of this paperlet is to use some homological algebra in order to prove the existence of a power series [math]\displaystyle{ e(x) }[/math] (with coefficients in [math]\displaystyle{ {\mathbb Q} }[/math]) which satisfies the non-linear equation

[Main]
[math]\displaystyle{ e(x+y)=e(x)e(y) }[/math]

as well as the initial condition

[Init]
[math]\displaystyle{ e(x)=1+x+ }[/math](higher order terms).

Alternative proofs of the existence of [math]\displaystyle{ e(x) }[/math] are of course available, including the explicit formula [math]\displaystyle{ e(x)=\sum_{k=0}^\infty\frac{x^k}{k!} }[/math]. Thus the value of this paperlet is not in the result it proves but rather in the allegorical story it tells: that there is a technique to solve functional equations such as [Main] using homology. There are plenty of other examples for the use of that technique, in which the equation replacing [Main] isn't as easy. Thus the exponential function seems to be the easiest illustration of a general principle and as such it is worthy of documenting.

Thus below we will pretend not to know the exponential function and/or its relationship with the differential equation [math]\displaystyle{ e'=e }[/math].

The Scheme

We aim to construct [math]\displaystyle{ e(x) }[/math] and solve [Main] inductively, degree by degree. Equation [Init] gives [math]\displaystyle{ e(x) }[/math] in degrees 0 and 1, and the given formula for [math]\displaystyle{ e(x) }[/math] indeed solves [Main] in degrees 0 and 1. So booting the induction is no problem. Now assume we've found a degree 7 polynomial [math]\displaystyle{ e_7(x) }[/math] which solves [Main] up to and including degree 7, but at this stage of the construction, it may well fail to solve [Main] in degree 8. Thus modulo degrees 9 and up, we have

[M]
[math]\displaystyle{ e_7(x+y)-e_7(x)e_7(y)=M(x,y) }[/math],

where [math]\displaystyle{ M(x,y) }[/math] is the "mistake for [math]\displaystyle{ e_7 }[/math]", a certain homogeneous polynomial of degree 8 in the variables [math]\displaystyle{ x }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ y }[/math].

Our hope is to "fix" the mistake [math]\displaystyle{ M }[/math] by replacing [math]\displaystyle{ e_7(x) }[/math] with [math]\displaystyle{ e_8(x)=e_7(x)+\epsilon(x) }[/math], where [math]\displaystyle{ \epsilon_8(x) }[/math] is a degree 8 "correction", a homogeneous polynomial of degree 8 in [math]\displaystyle{ x }[/math] (well, in this simple case, just a multiple of [math]\displaystyle{ x^8 }[/math]).

*1 The terms containing no [math]\displaystyle{ \epsilon }[/math]'s make a copy of the left hand side of [M]. The terms linear in [math]\displaystyle{ \epsilon }[/math] are [math]\displaystyle{ \epsilon(x+y) }[/math], [math]\displaystyle{ -e_7(x)\epsilon(y) }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ -\epsilon(x)e_7(y) }[/math]. Note that since the constant term of [math]\displaystyle{ e_7 }[/math] is 1 and since we only care about degree 8, the last two terms can be replaced by [math]\displaystyle{ -\epsilon(y) }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ -\epsilon(x) }[/math], respectively. Finally, we don't even need to look at terms higher than linear in [math]\displaystyle{ \epsilon }[/math], for these have degree 16 or more, high in the stratosphere.

So we substitute [math]\displaystyle{ e_8(x)=e_7(x)+\epsilon(x) }[/math] into [math]\displaystyle{ e(x+y)-e(x)e(y) }[/math] (a version of [Main]), expand, and consider only the low degree terms - those below and including degree 8:*1

[math]\displaystyle{ e_8(x+y)-e_8(x)e_8(y)=M(x,y)-\epsilon(y)+\epsilon(x+y)-\epsilon(x) }[/math].

We define a "differential" [math]\displaystyle{ d:{\mathbb Q}[x]\to{\mathbb Q}[x,y] }[/math] by [math]\displaystyle{ (df)(x,y)=f(y)-f(x+y)+f(x) }[/math], and the above equation becomes

[math]\displaystyle{ e_8(x+y)-e_8(x)e_8(y)=M(x,y)-(d\epsilon)(x,y) }[/math].
*2 It is worth noting that in some a priori sense the existence of an exponential function, a solution of [math]\displaystyle{ e(x+y)=e(x)e(y) }[/math], is quite unlikely. For [math]\displaystyle{ e }[/math] must be an element of the relatively small space [math]\displaystyle{ {\mathbb Q}[[x]] }[/math] of power series in one variable, but the equation it is required to satisfy lives in the much bigger space [math]\displaystyle{ {\mathbb Q}[[x,y]] }[/math]. Thus in some sense we have more equations than unknowns and a solution is unlikely. How fortunate we are!

To continue with our inductive construction we need to have that [math]\displaystyle{ e_8(x+y)-e_8(x)e_8(y)=0 }[/math]. Hence the existence of the exponential function hinges upon our ability to find an [math]\displaystyle{ \epsilon }[/math] for which [math]\displaystyle{ M=d\epsilon }[/math]. In other words, we must show that [math]\displaystyle{ M }[/math] is in the image of [math]\displaystyle{ d }[/math]. This appears hopeless unless we learn more about [math]\displaystyle{ M }[/math], for the domain space of [math]\displaystyle{ d }[/math] is much smaller than its target space and thus [math]\displaystyle{ d }[/math] cannot be surjective, and if [math]\displaystyle{ M }[/math] was in any sense "random", we simply wouldn't be able to find our correction term [math]\displaystyle{ \epsilon }[/math].*2

As we shall see momentarily by "finding syzygies", [math]\displaystyle{ \epsilon }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ M }[/math] fit within the 0th and 1st chain groups of a rather short complex

[math]\displaystyle{ \left(\epsilon\in C_0={\mathbb Q}[[x]]\right)\longrightarrow\left(M\in C_1={\mathbb Q}[[x,y]]\right)\longrightarrow\left(C_2={\mathbb Q}[[x,y,z]]\right) }[/math],

whose first differential was already written and whose second differential is given by [math]\displaystyle{ (dm)(x,y,z)=m(y,z)... }[/math]

Computing the Homology

So what kind of relations can we get for [math]\displaystyle{ M }[/math]? Well, it measures how close [math]\displaystyle{ e_7 }[/math] is to turning sums into products, so we can look for preservation of properties that both addition and multiplication have. For example, they're both commutative, so we should have [math]\displaystyle{ M(x,y)=M(y,x) }[/math], and indeed this is obvious from the definition. Now let's try associativity, that is, let's compute [math]\displaystyle{ e_7(x+y+z) }[/math] associating first as [math]\displaystyle{ (x+y)+z }[/math] and then as [math]\displaystyle{ x+(y+z) }[/math]. In the first way we get

[[math]\displaystyle{ e_7(x+y+z)=M(x+y,z)+e_7(x+y)e_7(z)=M(x+y,z)+\left(M(x,y)+e_7(x)e_7(y)\right)e_7(z) }[/math].]
{{{2}}}

In the second we get

[[math]\displaystyle{ e_7(x+y+z)=M(x,y+z)+e_7(x)e_7(y+z)=M(x+y,z)+e_7(x)\left(M(y,z)+e_7(y)e_7(z)\right) }[/math].]
{{{2}}}

Comparing these two we get an interesting relation for [math]\displaystyle{ M }[/math]: [math]\displaystyle{ M(x+y,z)+M(x,y)e_7(z) = M(x,y+z) + e_7(x)M(y,z) }[/math].