1. Introduction
Every one of us who has worked on classical orthogonal polynomials, special functions, or other related fields has, at some point, used the extensive list of quadratic transformation formulas for Gauss’ hypergeometric function,
, that many authors have so thoughtfully reproduced in their monographs, encyclopedias, and handbooks [
1,
2,
3]. They are extremely useful for students and researchers alike. In 1812, Gauss [
4] defined their famous infinite series as follows
The infinite series (
1) is usually denoted by the notation
, or simply
F, and is commonly known as Gauss’s function or the hypergeometric series. Gauss’s function or the hypergeometric series is a solution of a second-order differential equation. In this function, we have two numerator parameters,
u and
v, and one denominator parameter,
w, which are quantities that may be real or complex, with one exception that
w should not be zero or a negative integer and the quantity,
z, is called the variable of the series. It is interesting to mention here that for
and
(or, equivalently,
and
), the infinite series (
1) reduces to the well-known “geometric series”, and with this fact, the series (
1) is called “hypergeometric series”.
Moreover, in terms of Pochhammer’s symbol,
, which is defined for a
u complex number (
) by
The infinite series (
1) can be represented by
Further, in terms of the well-known Gamma function, the Pochhammer symbol,
, is represented by
By using a ratio test, it is not difficult to verify that the infinite series (
1):
Is convergent for all values of z, provided , and is divergent when ;
Is convergent for , provided , and is divergent when ;
Is absolutely convergent for , provided ; convergent, but not absolutely, for ; and divergent when .
The limiting case of (
3) is worthy mentioning here. For this, if we replace
z by
in (
3) and take the limit as
, then, since
, we arrive at the following infinite series, which is known in the literature either as a confluent hypergeometric function or as Kummer’s function,
,
We remark in passing that almost all elementary functions of mathematics and mathematical physics are special cases or limiting cases of Gauss’s hypergeometric function. For more details about Gauss’s hypergeometric function, we refer to the standard text of Rainville [
5].
Looking toward the definition of Gauss’s hypergeometric function, it is self-evident that symmetry occurs in the numerator parameters of Gauss’s hypergeometric function.
Moreover, it is evident that the transformation formulas (including quadratic and cubic) for the hypergeometric function play an important role in the theory of hypergeometric functions. A large number of very useful and interesting transformation formulas have been listed in the well-known paper by Goursat [
6].
However, in our present investigation, we are interested in the following quadratic transformation due to Kummer [
7]
provided that
are not natural numbers and
is not an integer.
The result (
6) is also recorded, for example, in the standard text of I.S. Gradshteyn and I.M. Ryzhik [
1] (
and
) and G. Andrews et al. [
2] (
page 127, with a slight modification), in the handbook by Abramowitz-Stegun [
3]
, and in DLMF: NIST Digital Library of Mathematical Functions,
https://dlmf.nist.gov/ (accessed on 15 June 2023)
[
8].
The transformation (1.6) is a quadratic transformation that relates two hypergeometric functions (with the linear argument in one and a quadratic in the other), which are true under some conditions. In fact, in [
1], page 1008,
, the authors wrote:
Generally speaking, the analytic function that is defined by the series has singularities at z = 0, 1, and ∞. (There are branch points in the general case.) From to , we cut the z-plane along the real axis; in other words, we require that for = 1. The series will then yield a single-valued analytic continuation on the cut plane, which can be obtained using the formulas below (provided is not a natural number and and are not integers). These equations allow for the calculation of values in the specified region, even when . If the corresponding correlations between are true, other closely related transformation formulas can also be employed to obtain the analytical continuation.
In 2011, Choi and Rathie [
9] established the following two formulas closely related to Kummer’s transformation (
6)
which is valid when
and
.
The aim of this paper is twofold: first, we will generalize the Choi and Rathie result to ; then, we give the right expressions with the isolated cases and .
Preliminaries and Main Notations
It is not out of place to mention here that Kummer [
7] established transformation Formula (
6) using the theory of differential equations. On the other hand, if, in (
6), we replace
z by
we obtain the following formula:
It is shown in the standard text of Rainville [
5] that transformation Formula (
8) can be proven very quickly by employing the following classical summation theorem due to Gauss [
4]:
provided
.
In addition to this, by considering the case when
is an integer and
u is either an even or an odd integer, very recently, Atia [
10] and Atia with Al-Mohaimeed [
11] established two results, which are recorded here
- (a)
- (b)
For
,
,
For simplicity, let us denote by
and
Atia and Al-Mohaimeed [
11] have also proven that
and
Here, we return to Equation (
6). If we replace
z by
, then it takes the following form
provided
, and
.
In 2011, Choi and Rathie [
9] established the result closely related to (
14) given below
provided
, and
.
In the next section, we give interesting generalizations of the identities (
14) and (
15) in the most general form.
3. Resolution of an Isolated Case
In this section, we shall establish two new and interesting results asserted in the following theorem.
Theorem 2. - (i)
For and , the following formula holds true: - (ii)
For and , the following formula holds true:
Proof. In order to prove results (
21) and (
22), let us first denote by
and
Then, let us express , and in terms of the functions of the function of , and .
For this, the first step is an easy task to see that the expression
can be written in the following form:
where
and
On the other hand, we have the following results
as well as
Here, we are ready to establish the results, (3.1) and (3.2), asserted in Theorem 2. Therefore, for
, we have
Similarly, for
we have
This completes the proof. □
Remark 1. For , the results (21) and (22), take the following form: - (i)
- (ii)
For , we have
One can use the following Maple commands
restart;
F1 := proc (u, v, z) options
operator, arrow; hypergeom([(1/2)∗u+1/2, (1/2)∗u], [v+1/2],
z^2/(2-z)^2) end proc;
F2 := proc (u, v, z) options operator, arrow;
(1-(1/2)∗z)^u∗hypergeom([u, v], [2∗v], z) end proc;
bvu := proc (u,
v, z) options operator, arrow;
2∗(z/(2-z))^(u-1-2∗v)∗sqrt(Pi)∗pochhammer((1/2)∗u, 1-v)
∗hypergeom([1-(1/2)∗u, 1/2+v-(1/2)∗u], [3/2], (2-z)^2/z^2)
∗(z^2/(2-z)^2-1)^(v-u)/GAMMA(1/2-v) end proc;
cvu := proc (u, v, z) options operator, arrow;
-(z/(2-z))^(u-2∗v)∗sqrt(Pi)∗pochhammer((1/2)∗u+1/2, -v)
∗hypergeom([v-(1/2)∗u, 1/2-(1/2)∗u], [1/2], (2-z)^2/z^2)
∗(z^2/(2-z)^2-1)^(v-u)/GAMMA(1/2-v) end proc;
G1 := proc (u, v, z) options operator, arrow;
(1+z)^(-u)∗hypergeom([u, v], [2∗v+1], 2∗z/(1+z)) end proc;
G2 :=proc (u, v, z) options operator, arrow; hypergeom([(1/2)∗u,
(1/2)∗u+1/2], [v+1/2], z^2) end proc;
G3 := proc (u, v, z) options
operator, arrow; u∗z∗hypergeom([(1/2)∗u+1/2, (1/2)∗u+1], [v+3/2],
z^2)/(2∗v+1) end proc; simplify(F1(6, -2, z)-F2(6, -2, z)-bvu(6,
-2, z));
0
factor(simplify(F1(5, -2, z)-F2(5, -2, z)-cvu(5, -2, z)));
0
simplify(hypergeom([u, v], [2∗v], z)-hypergeom([u, v], [2∗v+1], z)
-(1/2)∗z∗u∗hypergeom([v+1, u+1], [2∗v+2], z)/(2∗v+1));
0
simplify(F2(u, v, z)-u∗z∗F2(u+1, v+1, z)/((2∗(2∗v+1))∗(1-(1/2)∗z)));
(1-(1/2)∗z)^u∗hypergeom([u, v], [2∗v+1], z):
simplify(G1(u, v, z)-F2(u, v, 2∗z/(z+1))+u∗z∗F2(v+1, v+1 ,
2∗z/(z+1))/(2∗v+1)):; simplify(G2(u, v, z)-F1(u, v, 2∗z/(z+1)));
0
simplify(G3(u, v, z)-u∗z∗F1(u+1, v+1, 2∗z/(z+1))/(2∗v+1));
0
u := 8; vs. := -3; simplify(G1(u, v, z)-G2(u, v, z)+G3(u, v, z)
+bvu(u, v, 2∗z/(z+1))-u∗z∗cvu(u+1, v+1, 2∗z/(z+1))/(2∗v+1));
0
u := 8; vs. := -1; simplify(G1(u, v, z)-G2(u, v, z)+G3(u, v, z)
-bvu(u, v, 2∗z/(z+1))+u∗z∗cvu(u+1, v+1, 2∗z/(z+1))/(2∗v+1));
0
u := 7; vs. := -3; simplify(G1(u, v, z)-G2(u, v, z)+G3(u, v, z)
+cvu(u, v, 2∗z/(z+1))-u∗z∗bvu(u+1, v+1, 2∗z/(z+1))/(2∗v+1));
0
u := 1; vs. := -1; simplify(G1(u, v, z)-G2(u, v, z)+G3(u, v, z)
-cvu(u, v, 2∗z/(z+1))+u∗z∗bvu(u+1, v+1, 2∗z/(z+1))/(2∗v+1));
0
Remark 2. It is clear that the transformation formulaobtained earlier by Choi and Rathie is valid, provided , and . It is observed for the first time that the above-mentioned transformation formula still makes sense, even if v is any negative integer. Therefore, in this paper, an attempt was made to establish two results for any negative integer, v, with and .
We conclude this paper by remarking the general result of the form , in the most general form for any , by considering the following cases:
- 1.
For , it is neither zero nor a negative integer and .
- 2.
For , it is neither zero nor a negative integer and ,
these cases are under investigation and will form a subsequent paper in this direction.