(05/17/2021, 11:08 PM)tommy1729 Wrote: yeah but it does not matter if we solve

f(2x) = exp(f(x))

or

g(x+1) = exp(g(x))

essentially those equations are equivalent.

And even though they might not hold everywhere , where they do also transfers when you change one into the other.

Instead of using new names, just write out the equations explicitly.

In particular if we want to publish a readable paper we should define things as clear as possible rather then making up new terminology or symbols.

Unless you find different methods for different solutions of those different morphisms I see no usefulness ?

I might be wrong about those branches ... Not sure what equations were valid there ... Maybe my memory plays tricks on me.

But If I may advertise one of my questions ; special cases of similar functional equations are still unsolved :

https://math.stackexchange.com/questions...ght2-1-fz2

That seems to be within the spirit of these functional equations.

Sorry for being hard on a new valuable member or posting this at the wrong place , but im surprised at such a poll.

regards

tommy1729

Again, Tommy. I think you misunderstand the point.

What do we call a map, such that,

If we are in a space where, inversion (and hence, conjugation) doesn't make sense.

This is just to agree upon terminology. Mphlee is working on the categorical aspect, and he's wondering if there's a good word; or trying to find an agreed upon word.

This is incredibly relevant to this forum, because it's the principle of the base change function; but we're not necessarily assuming invertability.