Talk:Bessel function
 | This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Integral representation of Bessel functions of the second kind
[edit]How to derive the Integral representation of Bessel functions of the second kind from its definition Y(x)={Jn(x)cos(n times pi)-J-n(x)}/sin(n times pi) with n tends to a integer ? I eager to know the proof because the Integral representation explain the asymptotic behaviour of Y with large x. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.18.170.29 (talk • contribs)
Asymptotic expansion
[edit]The rambling in the section Bessel function#Asymptotic forms about absence of more precise asymptotic expansions is a result of a major confusion. For example, see the expansions 10.17.3 (and 10.17.17) in the NIST handbook. --Ilya-zz (talk) 05:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
Error in "Modified Bessel functions" section
[edit]In the "Modified Bessel functions: Iα, Kα" section I see the phrase "...when α is not an integer; when α is an integer, then the limit is used." This seems to be an error, and not merely above my head. Anyone care to comment? Sanpitch (talk) 17:11, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
Rayleigh's formula is for spherical Bessel function of the first kind jn(x) not for Jn(x)
[edit]The following formulas [28] are for jn(x), not for Jn(x). https://wikimedia.riteme.site/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/0772c8b0a04450eefc953f90004fc2eb76f918be The Rayleigh's formula [27] is for jn(x),too. Rjeffchen (talk) 15:49, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
Many annoying references to Mathematica
[edit]It strikes me that there are numerous references to Mathematica in many of the plots. I consider this a sneaky type of advertisement, which does not belong in a Wikipedia page. I already had bad experiences with the aggressive commercial branch of Wolfram in the past and so was a little shocked to see their influancde also popping up here. Actually, the same pictures or better can also be made by WxMaxima or Maple, so why refer to the package so many times? 130.161.210.156 (talk) 12:26, 13 January 2023 (UTC)