Timeline for What is the modern replacement for Tauberian Theorems?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 18, 2017 at 8:58 | comment | added | Vincent | Well yes, for me that would make the statement much clearer. As for your actual question I have no idea. | |
| Aug 17, 2017 at 13:32 | comment | added | john mangual | @Vincent instead of $\to$ should I just write "implies" ? I think in the modern "functorial" era, I could read these Tauberian theorems as a relationship between two different limits. I heard these are considered quite old-fashioned by analysts, but what would they replace it with? | |
| Aug 17, 2017 at 9:29 | comment | added | Vincent | Ehm to be clear: in my last remark I meant Hardy's notation, not yours | |
| Aug 16, 2017 at 14:43 | comment | added | Vincent | Ugh that is horrible | |
| Aug 16, 2017 at 13:21 | comment | added | john mangual | @Vincent I mad sure to use Hardy's own language. Just so you can see. The middle arrow just means "implies" while the ones on the left and the right are limits of some kind. | |
| Aug 16, 2017 at 13:00 | history | edited | john mangual | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
historical note
|
| Aug 16, 2017 at 12:45 | comment | added | Todd Trimble | The last sentence of the post is missing (at least) a verb. Also, re "Hardy wrote his text 40 years later" (i.e. 1972/3) -- Hardy died in 1947. | |
| Aug 16, 2017 at 12:36 | comment | added | Vincent | Thank you! I hope you get an answer, because I find the statement quite unreadable. Do all the occurences of $\to$ in the statement have the same meaning, or are some convergence, some indicating a function and some a logical implication? | |
| Aug 16, 2017 at 12:34 | comment | added | john mangual | @Vincent corrected. I'm also looking at Norbert Weiner's original 1932 paper on Tauberian Theorems but it's much harder to read. Hardy wrote his text 40 years later. | |
| Aug 16, 2017 at 12:33 | history | edited | john mangual | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
missing text
|
| Aug 16, 2017 at 12:32 | comment | added | Vincent | Some text seems to have disappeared or be replaced by a horizontal line. "I guess the theorem is that any $L^1$ function over the real line can be spanned by translates of a single function that". That what? The suspense is killing me... (Also: who is 'he' in the first line? Hardy?) | |
| Aug 16, 2017 at 12:22 | history | asked | john mangual | CC BY-SA 3.0 |