>>>>> "Wolfgang" == Wolfgang Jenkner writes:
Wolfgang> 1. (*) text/plain ( ) text/html
Wolfgang> Raymond Toy writes:
>> But, if I understand your derivation correctly, the ratio should be 1,
>> not 4/3/sqrt(%pi).
Wolfgang> It wouldn't be surprising if our definitions for various special
Wolfgang> functions were slightly different from those given elsewhere. Of
Wolfgang> course, it is absolutely essential to make them explicit, eventually.
Yes, I've run into that problem already. I think many of the formulas
from the Bateman Manuscript Project assume the arg is complex. But
some of the formulas at functions.wolfram.com assume the arg is
complex. So to make maxima match, I've used the complex version.
This, I think, is a source of some of the differences.
We probably need to ask the user if the arg is complex or real.
Wolfgang> No problem if you want to flag this as error instead, of course.
>> And at first glance, the transform of H_1(t) is completely different
>> from the answer given the DLMF.
Wolfgang> Yes, I couldn't make sense of it, either :-(
FWIW, maxima eventually evaluates 3F2(1,3/2,2;3/2,5/2,-z^2), which
should be the same as 2F1(1,2;5/2;-z^2), which I'm pretty sure maxima
gets right.
Wolfgang> In any case, I checked that the Laplace transform of H_1 and H_0 at
Wolfgang> the DLMF site is actually compatible with their definition of the
Wolfgang> Struve functions via integrals...
That's good to know.
Ray