Omega constant

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The Omega constant is a mathematical constant defined by

\Omega\,e^{\Omega}=1.\,

It is the value of W(1) where W is Lambert's W function. The name is derived from the alternate name for Lambert's W function, the Omega function.

The value of Ω is approximately 0.56714329040978387299996866221035554975381578718651250813513107911868218606033163864180370634902545380773757807516825805267767102176872019047786560057916365319936454603076753022511993394673457440338486 (sequence A030178 in OEIS). It has properties that

 e^{-\Omega}=\Omega,\,

or equivalently,

 \ln \Omega = - \Omega.\,

One can calculate Ω iteratively, by starting with an initial guess Ω0, and considering the sequence

 \Omega_{n+1}=e^{-\Omega_n}.\,

This sequence will converge towards Ω as n→∞. This convergence is due to the fact that  \Omega is an attractive fixed points of the function  e^{-x} .

Anyway, is much more efficient to use the iteration

\Omega_{n+1} = \frac{1+\Omega_n}{1+e^{\Omega_n}},

because the function

 f(x) = \frac{1+x}{1+e^x},

has the same fixed point but features a zero derivative at this fixed point, therefore the convergence is quadratic (the number of correct digits is roughly doubled with each iteration).

A beautiful identity due to Victor Adamchik is given by the relationship

 \Omega=\frac{1}{\displaystyle \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\frac{{\rm{d}}x}{(e^x-x)^2+\pi^2}}-1 .\,

[edit] Irrationality and transcendence

Ω can be proven irrational from the fact that e is transcendental; if Ω were rational, then there would exist integers p and q such that

 \frac{p}{q} = \Omega

so that

 1 = \frac{p e^{\left( \frac{p}{q} \right)}}{q}


 e = \left( \frac{q}{p} \right)^{\left( \frac{q}{p} \right)} = \sqrt[p]{\frac{q^q}{p^q}}

and e would therefore be algebraic of degree p. However e is transcendental, so Ω must be irrational.

Ω is in fact transcendental as the direct consequence of Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem. If Ω were algebraic, exp(Ω) would be transcendental and so would be exp−1(Ω). But this contradicts the assumption that it was algebraic.

[edit] See also

[edit] External links

Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Interaction
Toolbox
Print/export
Languages