John Cremona on Wed, 15 Feb 2012 16:24:28 +0100 |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: Complex AGM |
For a definition of what "optimal" means and why it matters for elliptic curve period computations, see http://arxiv.org/abs/1011.0914 I am pretty sure that taking the principal square root will never give a sequence converging to zero. Using the optimal branch always gives the largest limit (and hence the smallest periods), though there is al ittle more to the question than that. John On 15 February 2012 15:09, Bill Allombert <Bill.Allombert@math.u-bordeaux1.fr> wrote: > Hello PARI developers, > > I noticed the complex AGM function in PARI do not always return the so-called 'optimal' AGM. > However this is documented: > > ??agm > ... > In the case of complex or negative numbers, the principal square root is always chosen. > ... > So I am not sure whether this should be fixed. > However, do we have a proof of that PARI agm never diverges to zero ? > > Example of bad case are: > agm(1,-.00001) > which gives -0.0403257332 - 0.00327376459*I. > but the optimal AGM is > 0.114955789 + 0.0279973724*I > > Cheers, > Bill. >