Skip to main content
13 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Feb 2, 2023 at 21:58 history edited Mirar CC BY-SA 4.0
edited body
Feb 2, 2023 at 21:35 history edited Mirar CC BY-SA 4.0
added 336 characters in body
Feb 2, 2023 at 20:52 answer added Carlo Beenakker timeline score: 2
Feb 2, 2023 at 7:25 comment added Mirar Let us continue this discussion in chat.
Feb 1, 2023 at 15:56 history edited Mirar CC BY-SA 4.0
deleted 4 characters in body
Feb 1, 2023 at 11:55 comment added Mirar Valid point. Do you believe we cannot define $p(x,T)$ in terms of Cauchy integral in any way?
Feb 1, 2023 at 11:52 comment added Mirar Anyway, I am convinced that the extended definition is not true in general and I was wondering whether it would be possible to find a similar definition.
Feb 1, 2023 at 11:38 comment added Mirar Exactly! In your example, since x and T donot commute, as stated in the question, the extension definition cannot be correct.
Feb 1, 2023 at 11:34 comment added Carlo Beenakker for $T=d/dx$ consider $p(x,T)=Tx-xT$; if you insert that in your proposed formula, you would get $$p(x,T) = \oint_{C} p(x,z)(zI-T)^{-1}dz= \oint_{C} (zx-xz)(zI-T)^{-1}dz=0,$$ because $zx-xz=0$, but the correct answer is $p(x,T)=1$.
Feb 1, 2023 at 9:38 comment added Mirar If $xT=Tx$, I believe, the extended definition is valid which can be shown, in case of polynomials, by expanding $p(x,T)$.
Feb 1, 2023 at 9:29 comment added Mirar In my understanding, if it were to be symmetrical, $T$ and $x$ would commute, isn't it? Consider, for instance, $p(x,T)=(x+T)^2$. By expanding, $p(x,T)=x^2+xT+Tx+T^2$ consists of four operators and each of them can be defined by the integral above. E.g., $Tx=\oint_{C} z(zI-T)^{-1}xdz$ and $xT=\oint_{C} xz(zI-T)^{-1}dz$
Feb 1, 2023 at 6:46 history edited Mirar CC BY-SA 4.0
edited tags
Jan 31, 2023 at 21:21 history asked Mirar CC BY-SA 4.0