Talk:Cauchy's equation

Other Cauchy equations[edit]

DISAMBIGUATION: Cauchy's equation can also refer to a functional equation of form

find f(x,y) for all x,y \in N such that f(x)+f(y) = f(x+y)

Solution is f(x) = k x. This can be expanded by construction to sets Z and Q.

However, in reals additional requirements for the sole simple solution are for example one of the following:

there exists a finite interval, where f is bounded
in every finite interval, f is bounded
f is continuous
f is Lipschitz-continuous
f'(x) exists for all x \in R

Proofs for these can be found in standard literature.

(post above me is unsigned)

Cauchy's equation is just a polynomial if written in terms of frequency. Why is fitting a polynomial special? 134.60.166.4 (talk) 16:25, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@134.60.166.4: Because it is useful and reasonably accurate. Moreover, this 'fitting polynomial' can now be derived from a more correct theory. Nerd271 (talk) 21:14, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article unsupported by source[edit]

The article conflicted with something I thought and so I checked out the textbook it cites. The textbook which is the reference for this A: Defines the equation slightly differently (A+B/lambda squared + ...) B: Does not have the table of coefficients for common material properties C: Defines wavelength in angstroms. The standard in the field *is* to use microns, but this textbook it cite neither uses it, nor discusses it.

I use the cauchy equation every day in my research (and came here in response to a debate on the units of B/C). While the table defining B with units of microns does vindivate me, the source of the article does not. Other than the source being inaccurate, and weirdly starting at B for the sum, I agree with everything in this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Schumi23 (talk • contribs) 00:10, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]