24

When you calculate what ${x}^{x^{x^{x\cdots }}}$ converges to between $0$ and $1$, before approximately $0.065$ the graph bifurcates.

graph image

Why does this happen and is there a reason for it happens at that number?

Babado
  • 1,306
  • 9
    A preliminary obsevation: when $x\rightarrow0$, $x^x\rightarrow1, x^{x^x}\rightarrow0,x^{x^{x^x}}\rightarrow1$, etc. So it may turn out that the sequence is "alternating." – Tesla Daybreak Mar 02 '21 at 06:16
  • 19
    Maybe this will help someone else work out the details: it looks like the transition is at $e^{-e} \approx 0.065988$. When $0 < c < e^{-e}$ it appears that there's a unique positive real solution $x_0$ to $x = c^x$, but it's an unstable equilibrium point because we have $\big| \frac{d}{dx}(c^x)|_{x = x_0} \big| > 1$. – Ravi Fernando Mar 02 '21 at 06:23
  • 6
    Related topic: https://math.stackexchange.com/q/1899599, https://math.stackexchange.com/q/87870. – user Mar 02 '21 at 08:29
  • 1
    See also this article and the links out of Wiki. – metamorphy Mar 02 '21 at 08:32
  • A nice question –  Mar 02 '21 at 08:38
  • 1
    Just curious: how did you obtain the red line? – Han de Bruijn Mar 05 '21 at 20:16
  • @HandeBruijn : take some small number $0 \lt b \lt 1/e^e$ as base, and iterate. Document each value alternatingly in a different bin, say $t_{lo}$ and $t_{hi}$. The values in the two bins converge over the iterations to individual limits. Do this for many $0 \lt b \lt 1/e^e$ and plot the two convergents for all of the chosen bases. For the $t_{lo}$ use light-blue, for the $t_{hi}$ use red for plotting... – Gottfried Helms Mar 06 '21 at 12:41
  • @GottfriedHelms: What I did was programming the power tower as $f_{k+1}(x)=x^{f_k(x)}$ for $0 \le k \lt n$, starting with $f_0(x)=x$. Then I could reproduce the blue plot of $f_n(x)$ for $n=$ even. Thanks to your comment I see now that $f_n(x)$ for $n=$ odd gives the red line. – Han de Bruijn Mar 06 '21 at 13:19
  • Is there any exact value ($\approx 0.4$) of the tower function for $x=1/e^e$? – Han de Bruijn Mar 06 '21 at 13:42
  • @HandeBruijn - if this is what you're asking: with $b=(\text{or }x=)1/e^e$ it is known that the convergent is $t_{lo}=t_{hi}=1/e$ – Gottfried Helms Mar 06 '21 at 15:12
  • @GottfriedHelms: Thanks again. I think that there is so much known that it's almost impossible for us to contribute anything new. – Han de Bruijn Mar 06 '21 at 15:43
  • @GottfriedHelms. Sorry for abusing this thread for the purpose of reaching you. I vagually remember that you were involved with a problem like: solve the functional equation $h(h(x))=\exp(x)$. Is it true? And where is that question at MSE, because I can't find it anymore. – Han de Bruijn Mar 13 '21 at 13:23
  • @HandeBruijn - yes, I've been much with that question, and answered/asked sometimes here in MSE, but as well in MO. The place where I've contributed most is the tetration-forum user "Gottfried" https://math.eretrandre.org/tetrationforum/ Also I've done a couple of essays and technical studies (everything much amateurish & exploratory) put at my webpage http://go.helms-net.de/math/tetdocs/index.htm. You might ask more precisely what you are after with this your query? – Gottfried Helms Mar 13 '21 at 15:28
  • 1
  • The $0.065$ likely is $e^{-e}$ – Тyma Gaidash May 16 '23 at 00:04

2 Answers2

4

The following reference is recommended reading, if you want to have a more detailed account of what follows:

The power tower at hand is recursively defined as: $$ h_0(x) = x \quad ; \quad h_{n+1}(x) = x^{h_n(x)} \quad ; \quad h(x) = \lim_{n\to\infty} h_n(x) $$ The recursion process is visualized in the picture below:

enter image description here

The $\color{blue}{blue\;lines}$ are the iterands for $n=$ odd; the $\color{red}{red\;lines}$ are the iterands for $n=$ even. It is seen that splitting up odd and even starts at $x\lt 1$ and that there is a bifurcation point (black dot). Going to infinity leads to the functional equation: $$ y = x^y \quad \mbox{with} \quad y = h(x) $$ The inverse function (where it exists) has an explicit analytical form, which is the black line in the above figure: $$ x = y^{1/y} $$ And can be used to establish the rightmost bound of the tower's domain: $$ \frac{d}{dy}y^{1/y} = e^{\ln(y)/y}\left[-\frac{\ln(y)}{y^2}+\frac{1}{y^2}\right] = 0 \\ \Longrightarrow \quad \ln(y)=1 \quad \Longrightarrow \quad y=e \; ; \; x=e^{1/e} $$ But in order to answer the question as stated, we have to consider another functional equation, namely: $$ y = x^{x^y} $$ Odd and even are separated now, as is required for observing the bifurcation. There is no neat inverse function of the latter equation. Therefore we shall investigate the two-dimensional funcion $\,f(x,y)=x^{x^y}-y\,$. An insightful way to do this is make an isoline chart / contour plot of the function. Lines are darker where the contour levels are higher. The massive black line is the place where $f(x,y)=0$.

enter image description here

Implicit differentiation is employed for finding the derivatives: $$ df = \frac{\partial f}{\partial x} dx + \frac{\partial f}{\partial y} dy \\ df = x^{x^y}\left[\frac{x^y y \ln(x)}{x} + \frac{x^y}{x}\right] dx + \left[x^{x^y}x^y\ln^2(x)-1\right] dy $$ If the gradient is zero, then $f(x,y)$ has a critical point at that place: $$ \begin{cases} \partial f/\partial x = 0 & y \ln(x)+1 = 0 \\ \partial f/\partial y = 0 & x^{x^y}x^y\ln^2(x)-1=0 \end{cases} $$ Both equations are essentially the same, because $\,x^{x^y}=x^y=y\,$, giving with $\,x=y^{1/y}\,$: $$ y \ln(y^{1/y})+1 = \ln(y)+1 = 0 \quad \Longrightarrow \quad y = 1/e \quad ; \quad x = e^{-e} $$ If we look at the picture with the isolines, then it is evident that the bifurcation must be at this place, with coordinates $\,(x,y)=(e^{-e},1/e)\,$.

EDIT.

It is observed in the last picture that the isolines in the neighborhood of the critical point are like hyperbolas. To confirm this observation, the second order derivatives at the bifurcation point should be investigated as well. Let a computer algebra system (MAPLE) do the hard work.

> f(x,y) := x^(x^y)-y;
> A(x,y) := diff(diff(f(x,y),x),x);
> B(x,y) := diff(diff(f(x,y),x),y);
> C(x,y) := diff(diff(f(x,y),y),y);
> D(x,y) := diff(diff(f(x,y),y),x);
> a := simplify(subs({x=exp(1)^(-exp(1)),y=1/exp(1)},A(x,y)));
                          exp(-3 + 2 exp(1))
> b := simplify(subs({x=exp(1)^(-exp(1)),y=1/exp(1)},B(x,y)));
                          -exp(-1 + exp(1))
> c := simplify(subs({x=exp(1)^(-exp(1)),y=1/exp(1)},C(x,y)));
                                  0
> d := simplify(subs({x=exp(1)^(-exp(1)),y=1/exp(1)},D(x,y)));
                          -exp(-1 + exp(1))
So the Hessian matrix at the crirical point is: $$ \begin{bmatrix} a & b \\ b & c \end{bmatrix} = \begin{bmatrix} e^{-3+2e} & -e^{-1+e} \\ -e^{-1+e} & 0 \end{bmatrix} $$ And the two eigenvalues of the Hessian turn out to be $$ \lambda_{1,2} = \frac{a+c}{2} \pm \sqrt{b^2 + \left(\frac{a-c}{2}\right)^2} \\ = \frac{1}{2} e^{-3+2e} \left[1 \pm \sqrt{\left(2\frac{e^{-1+e}}{e^{-3+2e}}\right)^2+1}\right] $$ Herewith it is clear that one eigenvalue is positive while the other is negative. Therefore the critical point is a saddle point, as expected. As has been said, the isolines in the neighborhood of this saddle point are hyperbolas. The asymptotes of these hyperbolas can be calculated as follows. $$ \begin{bmatrix} x-e^{-e} & y-1/e \end{bmatrix} \begin{bmatrix} a & b \\ b & c \end{bmatrix} \begin{bmatrix} x-e^{-e} \\ y-1/e \end{bmatrix} = 0 \\ e^{-3+2e}\left(x-e^{-e}\right)^2-2\,e^{-1+e}\left(x-e^{-e}\right)\left(y-1/e\right) = 0 \\ \Longrightarrow \quad x = e^{-e} \quad ; \quad y = 1/e + e^{e-2}/2\cdot\left(x-e^{-e}\right) $$ The asymptotes are tangent to the crossing massive black lines at the critical point.

Note. One doesn't need a tower of powers to observe bifurcation.
What is the value of $\,x^0\,$ for $\,x=0\,$? As a physicist by education, I would think that the limit of $\,x^0\,$ for $x\downarrow 0$ is a bifurcation at $\,(x,y)=(0,1)\,$, as is clearly seen in the picture below. Actually displayed are graphs of $y=x^{1/N}$ with $N\in\{\color{red}{-2,-4,-6,-8,-20},\color{blue}{+20,+8,+6,+4,+3}\,\}$.

enter image description here

Formulated otherwise it would mean that $\,y=x^0=1\,$ is only defined for $\,x\gt 0\,$; it is not a function at $\,x=0\,$ and we have Commutativity of iterated limits: $$ \lim_{x\downarrow 0}\lim_{N\to\infty} \begin{cases} \color{blue}{x^{+1/N} = [0,1]} \\ \color{red}{x^{-1/N} = [1,\infty]} \end{cases} \\ \lim_{N\to\infty}\lim_{x\downarrow 0} \begin{cases} \color{blue}{x^{+1/N} = [0,1]} \\ \color{red}{x^{-1/N} = [1,\infty]} \end{cases} $$

Han de Bruijn
  • 17,070
  • @HandeBrujin $x^{x^y}x^y\ln^2(x)=1$ does not look like the boundary, in green in the link, of where the bifurcation converges. Do you know the equation for it? – Тyma Gaidash Mar 11 '23 at 02:05
0

See Projective Fractals for an explanation of why the bifurcation is at $e^{e^{2 \pi i x-{e^{2 \pi i x}}}}$ where $x=-1$. tetration Mandelbrot fractal