Arxiv:1607.06196V2 [Math.CA] 28 Dec 2018 K = 3, J = 4, So a Natural Question Is: What Is This Representation? This Problem Has Been Solved in the Mean Time
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Symmetry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications SIGMA 12 (2016), 071, 13 pages Report from the Open Problems Session at OPSFA13? Edited by Howard S. COHL Applied and Computational Mathematics Division, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Mission Viejo, CA, 92694 USA E-mail: [email protected] URL: http://www.nist.gov/itl/math/msg/howard-s-cohl.cfm Received January 28, 2016, in final form July 12, 2016; Published online July 21, 2016 https://doi.org/10.3842/SIGMA.2016.071 Abstract. These are the open problems presented at the 13th International Symposium on Orthogonal Polynomials, Special Functions and Applications (OPSFA13), Gaithersburg, Maryland, on June 4, 2015. Key words: Schur's inequality; hypergeometric functions; orthogonal polynomials; lineariza- tion coefficients; connection coefficients; symbolic summation; multiple summation; numer- ical algorithms; Gegenbauer polynomials; multiple zeta values; distribution of zeros 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification: 31C12; 32Q10; 33C05; 33C45; 33C55; 33F10; 35J05 1 Schur's inequality Posed by Richard Askey Department of Mathematics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, 53706, USA E-mail: [email protected] In Hardy, Littlewood and P´olya's book \Inequalities" [22, Problem 60 on p. 64], the following inequality (communicated by I. Schur) was stated: xn(x − y)(x − z) + yn(y − x)(y − z) + zn(z − x)(z − y) > 0; when x, y, z are positive and not all equal, and n ≥ 0. It is not hard to show that the inequality is true for all real x, y, z for n even when > 0 is replaced by ≥ 0. There is a strange theorem of Hilbert [23]. He proved that if one has a polynomial in k variables which is homogeneous of degree j and which is nonnegative for all real values of the variables, then it can be written as a sum of k squares when either k or j is 2, and when k = 3 and j = 4, but not necessarily in all other cases. The case n = 2 fits the exceptional condition arXiv:1607.06196v2 [math.CA] 28 Dec 2018 k = 3, j = 4, so a natural question is: what is this representation? This problem has been solved in the mean time. The answer is 1 2x2 − y2 − z2 + 2yz − xz − xy2 + 3y2 − z2 + xz − xy2: 4 James Wan (Singapore University of Technology and Design) was the first to send this to me. Shortly after that, I got a solution using software of Erich Kaltofen (North Carolina State University) and Zhengfeng Yang (Shanghai key Laboratory of Trustworthy Computing), which was run by Zhengfeng Yang. Manuel Kauers (RISC, Johannes Kepler University of Linz, Austria) sent the problem to Erich Kaltofen, who was traveling and he sent it to his coworker. I was indeed hoping for something like this. ?This paper is a contribution to the Special Issue on Orthogonal Polynomials, Special Functions and Applica- tions. The full collection is available at http://www.emis.de/journals/SIGMA/OPSFA2015.html 2 H.S. Cohl 2 Blumenthal{Nevai theorems for the one quarter class of orthogonal polynomials Posed by Ted Chihara Purdue University, Calumet, Hammond, IN, 46323, USA E-mail: [email protected] Consider an orthogonal polynomial sequence (OPS), fPn(x)g, which is defined by the classical three term recurrence relation (n ≥ 1), Pn(x) = (x − cn)Pn−1(x) − λnPn−2(x); with P−1(x) = 0, P0(x) = 1, cn real, and λn > 0. Supposep first that the sequencesp fcng and fλng 1 1 converge to finite limits, c and λ. Let σ = 2 (c − 2 λ) and τ = 2 (c + 2 λ). In his dissertation written under David Hilbert, O. Blumenthal [6] proved that the zeroes of all of the Pn(x) form a set that is dense in the interval [σ; τ]. More recently, P. Nevai [30] proved that in fact the interval [σ; τ] is the essential spectrum of the orthogonal polynomial system (i.e., of the operator given by the corresponding Jacobi matrix). See [7, 11] for references and historical facts. We would like to find analogues of these theorems when the sequences above are unbounded. To this end, let us consider the \one quarter class" of orthogonal polynomials (see [10]); namely, let lim cn = 1, and n!1 λ 1 lim n+1 = : n!1 cncn+1 4 Now let xn;1 < xn;2 < ··· < xn;n, denote the zeros of Pn(x) and let ξi = lim xn;i; ηj = lim xn;n−j+1; σ = lim ξi; τ = lim ηj: n!1 n!1 i!1 j!1 Now under the above conditions (i.e., for the one-quarter class), we will have τ = 1, and each of the three cases, σ = −∞; jσj < 1; σ = 1; can occur. Sufficient conditions for each of the three cases to occur can be expressed in terms of the concept of \eventual chain sequences" (see [9]). Now the case σ = 1 corresponds to the orthogonality measure having a discrete spectrum with 1 as its only limit point. A specific example is furnished by certain Meixner polynomials of the first kind [8]. For the case when jσj < 1, we proved [7] that the set of all zeros of the corresponding orthogonal polynomials is dense in the interval [σ; 1). Later, we posed [11] the problem of determining, after imposing additional conditions, if necessary, that [σ; 1) is a subset of the spectrum (that is, it is the essential spectrum). We hasten to remind that when σ is finite, the corresponding Hamburger moment problem will be determined (a fact that was known to Stieltjes). Recently, Grzegorz Swiderski´ [36] has proven that, with a slight additional condition (a certain monotonicity condition), in fact [σ; 1) is indeed the essential spectrum, thus settling this open problem (see also [2]). This now leaves the most difficult case, σ = −∞. We thus pose the inevitable question: Is there an analog of Blumenthal's theorem for this case? The lack of specific examples of OPS whose orthogonality measure has a spectrum extending over the entire real line makes this situation the most difficult to conjecture about. The only known example of OPS of this type, are the Meixner polynomials of the second kind [8] (i.e., the so-called \Meixner{Pollaczek" polynomials). Do there exist any other OPS examples of this type? Report from the Open Problems Session at OPSFA13 3 3 Generalized linearization formulas for hypergeometric orthogonal polynomials Posed by Howard S. Cohl Applied and Computational Mathematics Division, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Mission Viejo, CA, 92694, USA E-mail: [email protected] Given a hypergeometric orthogonal polynomial Pn(x; a), where a is a set of arbitrary pa- rameters, we would like to obtain closed-form expressions for the coefficients of generalized linearization formulas. A linearization formula for a hypergeometric orthogonal polynomial is an expression of type m+n X Pm(x; a)Pn(x; a) = αk;m;n(a)Pk(x; a); (3.1) k=0 whereas a connection relation for a hypergeometric orthogonal polynomial is given by n X Pn(x; a) = βk;n(a; b)Pk(x; b): (3.2) k=0 The coefficients αk;m;n(a), βk;n(a; b) are usually given in terms of products of Pochhammer symbols (shifted factorials), generalized hypergeometric functions with fixed arguments, or mul- tiple hypergeometric functions with fixed arguments. In our context, a generalized linearization formula is given by m+n X Pm(x; a)Pn(x; a) = γk;m;n(a; b)Pk(x; b): k=0 Generalized linearization formulae are obtained by inserting the connection relation (3.2) in the linearization formula (3.1) and using series rearrangement with justification to identify the coefficient γk;m;n(a; b). Some concrete examples which we will discuss below are the Laguerre [26, Section 9.12], Gegenbauer [26, Section 9.8.1], continuous q-ultraspherical/Rogers [26, Sec- tion 14.10.1], Jacobi [26, Section 9.8], and continuous q-Jacobi [26, Section 14.10] polynomials. Below we assume the product convention for (q-)Pochhammer symbols, namely (a1; a2;:::; an)k := (a1)k(a2)k ··· (an)k, and (a1; a2; : : : ; an; q)k := (a1; q)k(a2; q)k ··· (an; q)k. We also adopt the following notations to indicate sequential elements in a list of elements, namely ±a := a fa; −ag, and f(g; fbg) := ff(g; a); f(g; b)g. For the linearization formulas that we present below, we will assume without loss of generality for n; m 2 N0 := f0; 1; 2;:::g that n ≥ m. For the Laguerre polynomials [26, equation (9.12.1)], the connection relation is [31, equa- tion (18.18.18)] n X (α − β)n−k Lα(x) = Lβ(x); n (n − k)! k k=0 and the linearization formula is 2m α α X α α Lm(x)Ln(x) = Ak;m;nLk (x); k=0 4 H.S. Cohl where 0 f0g 1 (−1)m(−α − n) (−2m; n − m + 1) −k+ 1 α m k −α − m; 2 Ak;m;n := 3F2 @ ; 1A : m!k!(α + 1 + n − m)k 1 n − m + 1; 2 − m This linearization formula follows through a limiting procedure from the Rahman linearization formula of Jacobi polynomials given below, (3.3). Note that [34, equations (63) and (64)] gives a 3F2(1) linearization formula for Laguerre polynomials, but that it does not seem to be correct. On the other hand, [25, equations (6.2) and (6.3)] does give a correct linearization formula for Laguerre polynomials, but it is not easily converted to the relatively simple 3F2(1) form which results from Rahman's Jacobi linearization formula (3.3).