Series convergence without sigma notation
Consider the following series:
$$frac{1}{1} + frac{10}{2} + frac{100}{3} - frac{37}{4} - frac{37}{5} - frac{37}{6} + frac{1}{7} + frac{10}{8} + frac{100}{9} - frac{37}{10} - frac{37}{11} - frac{37}{12} + dots$$
This series seems to converge but I am not able to prove it. It seems impossible to write thing whole thing into summation notation. I tried to group by modulo 6, but then for example sum of $frac{1}{6n+1}$ diverges already so that doesn't seem right. Also tried to change the 37s into powers of 10 to maybe use the comparison test but also failed.
Any suggestions?
sequences-and-series
add a comment |
Consider the following series:
$$frac{1}{1} + frac{10}{2} + frac{100}{3} - frac{37}{4} - frac{37}{5} - frac{37}{6} + frac{1}{7} + frac{10}{8} + frac{100}{9} - frac{37}{10} - frac{37}{11} - frac{37}{12} + dots$$
This series seems to converge but I am not able to prove it. It seems impossible to write thing whole thing into summation notation. I tried to group by modulo 6, but then for example sum of $frac{1}{6n+1}$ diverges already so that doesn't seem right. Also tried to change the 37s into powers of 10 to maybe use the comparison test but also failed.
Any suggestions?
sequences-and-series
Related: 1 and 2
– Mason
Dec 13 '18 at 2:02
add a comment |
Consider the following series:
$$frac{1}{1} + frac{10}{2} + frac{100}{3} - frac{37}{4} - frac{37}{5} - frac{37}{6} + frac{1}{7} + frac{10}{8} + frac{100}{9} - frac{37}{10} - frac{37}{11} - frac{37}{12} + dots$$
This series seems to converge but I am not able to prove it. It seems impossible to write thing whole thing into summation notation. I tried to group by modulo 6, but then for example sum of $frac{1}{6n+1}$ diverges already so that doesn't seem right. Also tried to change the 37s into powers of 10 to maybe use the comparison test but also failed.
Any suggestions?
sequences-and-series
Consider the following series:
$$frac{1}{1} + frac{10}{2} + frac{100}{3} - frac{37}{4} - frac{37}{5} - frac{37}{6} + frac{1}{7} + frac{10}{8} + frac{100}{9} - frac{37}{10} - frac{37}{11} - frac{37}{12} + dots$$
This series seems to converge but I am not able to prove it. It seems impossible to write thing whole thing into summation notation. I tried to group by modulo 6, but then for example sum of $frac{1}{6n+1}$ diverges already so that doesn't seem right. Also tried to change the 37s into powers of 10 to maybe use the comparison test but also failed.
Any suggestions?
sequences-and-series
sequences-and-series
asked Dec 12 '18 at 21:34
Markus PunnarMarkus Punnar
1549
1549
Related: 1 and 2
– Mason
Dec 13 '18 at 2:02
add a comment |
Related: 1 and 2
– Mason
Dec 13 '18 at 2:02
Related: 1 and 2
– Mason
Dec 13 '18 at 2:02
Related: 1 and 2
– Mason
Dec 13 '18 at 2:02
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
First, notice that $$F_n=frac{1}{6n+1}+frac{10}{6n+2}+frac{100}{6n+3}-frac{37}{6n+4}-frac{37}{6n+5}-frac{37}{6n+6} geq frac{111}{6n+3}-frac{111}{6n+4} > 0.$$
Then, notice that $$F_n leq frac{111}{6n+1}-frac{111}{6n+6}=frac{555}{(6n+1)(6n+6)}.$$
Thus the sum of $F_n$ converges. How can you infer the final result from this?
2
Alternatively, you can write $$F_n = {frac {303264,{n}^{4}+649296,{n}^{3}+471096,{n}^{2}+132516,n+ 11892}{ left( 6,n+1 right) left( 6,n+2 right) left( 6,n+3 right) left( 6,n+4 right) left( 6,n+5 right) left( 6,n+6 right) }} $$ and note that the numerator has degree $4$ and denominator degree $6$, so $F_n = O(1/n^2)$.
– Robert Israel
Dec 12 '18 at 22:09
add a comment |
I presume the pattern $(1, 10, 100, -37, -37, -37)$ continues forever, so this is
$$ sum_{n=1}^infty frac{a_n}{n}$$
where $$ a_n = cases{1 & if $n equiv 1 mod 6$cr
10 & if $n equiv 2 mod 6$cr
100 & if $n equiv 3 mod 6$cr
-37 & if $n equiv 4,5$ or $0 mod 6$cr}$$
Note that $1+10+100 - 3times 37 = 0$. Then the $6m$
-th partial sum
$$ eqalign{S_m &= sum_{n=1}^{6m} frac{a_n}{n}cr
& = sum_{j=0}^m frac{1}{6j+1} +
10 sum_{j=0}^m frac{1}{6j+2} + 100 sum_{j=0}^m frac{1}{6j+3}
- 37 sum_{k=4}^6 sum_{j=0}^m frac{1}{6j+k}cr
&= frac{1}{6} left(Psi(m+1+1/6) - Psi(1/6) + 10 (Psi(m+1+2/6) - Psi(2/6)) + 100 (Psi(m+1+3/6) - Psi(3/6)) - 37 (Psi(m+1+4/6)+Psi(m+1+5/6)+Psi(m+1+6/6)-Psi(4/6)-Psi(5/6)-Psi(6/6))right)cr}$$
and since $Psi(x) = ln(x) + O(1/x)$ as $x to infty$, the sum converges.
In fact, the limit is
$$ frac{64}{3} ln(2) - frac{63}{4} ln(3) +frac{161}{36} pi sqrt{3}$$
How is $Psi$ defined exactly?
– Karlo
Dec 13 '18 at 10:13
1
Also known as the Digamma function. $Psi(x) = dfrac{d}{dx} ln(Gamma(x))$.
– Robert Israel
Dec 13 '18 at 13:28
add a comment |
Added for your curiosity but too long for a comment.
Starting from Robert Israel's elegant answer, it is possible to have quite accurate approximations of the partiel sums using the fact that, for large values of $p$ we have
$$Psi (p)=log left({p}right)-frac{1}{2 p}-frac{1}{12 p^2}+frac{1}{120
p^4}+Oleft(frac{1}{p^6}right)$$ making
$$S_m=left(frac{64}{3} ln(2) - frac{63}{4} ln(3) +frac{161}{36} pi sqrt{3}right)-frac{13}{2
m}+frac{23}{3 m^2}-frac{311}{36 m^3}+frac{499}{54 m^4}-frac{36377}{3888
m^5}+Oleft(frac{1}{m^6}right)$$ Below are listed some values
$$left(
begin{array}{ccc}
m & text{approximation} & text{exact} \
2 & 19.691108 & 19.787015 \
3 & 20.259944 & 20.269370 \
4 & 20.565282 & 20.567065 \
5 & 20.768485 & 20.768971 \
6 & 20.914700 & 20.914867 \
7 & 21.025135 & 21.025202 \
8 & 21.111527 & 21.111558 \
9 & 21.180965 & 21.180981
end{array}
right)$$
add a comment |
If you also want to calculate the sum of this series there's no need for anything but the series of the complex logarithm
$$
S(z)=-log(1-z)=z+frac{z^2}2+frac{z^3}3+cdots=sum_{n=1}^inftyfrac{z^n}n
$$
evaluated at selected roots of unity $neq1$. This is fine because the series $S(z)$
converges when $|z|le1, zneq1$.
Assume that the sequence $(a_n)_{nge1}$ is periodic with period $L$. Also assume that $a_1+a_2+cdots+a_L=0$. We can then write
$$
sum_{n=1}^inftyfrac{a_n}n
$$
as a linear combination of the series $S(zeta_L^k)$, $k=1,2,ldots,L_1$, with $zeta_L=e^{2pi i/L}$.
The tool for that is the discrete Fourier transform on $Bbb{Z}_L.$ We have the characters
$$chi_j:Bbb{Z}_LtoBbb{C}^*, chi_j(overline{n})=zeta_L^{jn}, n=0,1,ldots,L_1.$$
DFT guarantees that there exists coefficients $c_0,c_1,ldots,c_{L-1}$ such that
for all $n=0,1,ldots,L-1$
$$
a_n=sum_{j=0}^{L-1}c_jchi_j(overline{n}).
$$
More precisely, the inverse Fourier transform gives the formula
$$
c_j=frac1Lsum_{n=0}^{L-1}a_noverline{chi_j}(overline{n})=frac1Lsum_{n=0}^{L-1}a_nzeta_L^{-nj}.
$$
Observe that
$$c_0=frac1L(a_1+a_2+cdots+a_L)=0.$$
This will be important because it implies that the divergent harmonic series is missing in what follows, namely
$$
sum_{n=1}^inftyfrac{a_nz^n}n=frac1Lsum_{j=0}^{L-1}sum_{n=1}^infty frac{c_jzeta_L^{nj}z^n}n=frac1Lsum_{j=0}^{L-1}c_jS(zeta^{j}z)$$
whenever all the series converge.
In the present case $L=6, a_1=1,a_2=10,a_3=100,a_4=a_5=a_6=-37$, so the zero assumption holds (as also pointed out by all the other answerers). A routine calculation gives
$$
begin{aligned}
c_1=overline{c_5}&=frac1{12}(-283-85isqrt3)\
c_2=overline{c_4}&=frac34(21+isqrt3)\
c_3&=-frac{64}3.
end{aligned}
$$
So the sum of this series is
$$
-frac16sum_{j=1}^5c_jlog(1-zeta_6^j).
$$
A similar example. Too similar in fact. Turning this into CW. Likely that the same technique has been used in other answers as well.
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Dec 18 '18 at 19:56
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3037247%2fseries-convergence-without-sigma-notation%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
First, notice that $$F_n=frac{1}{6n+1}+frac{10}{6n+2}+frac{100}{6n+3}-frac{37}{6n+4}-frac{37}{6n+5}-frac{37}{6n+6} geq frac{111}{6n+3}-frac{111}{6n+4} > 0.$$
Then, notice that $$F_n leq frac{111}{6n+1}-frac{111}{6n+6}=frac{555}{(6n+1)(6n+6)}.$$
Thus the sum of $F_n$ converges. How can you infer the final result from this?
2
Alternatively, you can write $$F_n = {frac {303264,{n}^{4}+649296,{n}^{3}+471096,{n}^{2}+132516,n+ 11892}{ left( 6,n+1 right) left( 6,n+2 right) left( 6,n+3 right) left( 6,n+4 right) left( 6,n+5 right) left( 6,n+6 right) }} $$ and note that the numerator has degree $4$ and denominator degree $6$, so $F_n = O(1/n^2)$.
– Robert Israel
Dec 12 '18 at 22:09
add a comment |
First, notice that $$F_n=frac{1}{6n+1}+frac{10}{6n+2}+frac{100}{6n+3}-frac{37}{6n+4}-frac{37}{6n+5}-frac{37}{6n+6} geq frac{111}{6n+3}-frac{111}{6n+4} > 0.$$
Then, notice that $$F_n leq frac{111}{6n+1}-frac{111}{6n+6}=frac{555}{(6n+1)(6n+6)}.$$
Thus the sum of $F_n$ converges. How can you infer the final result from this?
2
Alternatively, you can write $$F_n = {frac {303264,{n}^{4}+649296,{n}^{3}+471096,{n}^{2}+132516,n+ 11892}{ left( 6,n+1 right) left( 6,n+2 right) left( 6,n+3 right) left( 6,n+4 right) left( 6,n+5 right) left( 6,n+6 right) }} $$ and note that the numerator has degree $4$ and denominator degree $6$, so $F_n = O(1/n^2)$.
– Robert Israel
Dec 12 '18 at 22:09
add a comment |
First, notice that $$F_n=frac{1}{6n+1}+frac{10}{6n+2}+frac{100}{6n+3}-frac{37}{6n+4}-frac{37}{6n+5}-frac{37}{6n+6} geq frac{111}{6n+3}-frac{111}{6n+4} > 0.$$
Then, notice that $$F_n leq frac{111}{6n+1}-frac{111}{6n+6}=frac{555}{(6n+1)(6n+6)}.$$
Thus the sum of $F_n$ converges. How can you infer the final result from this?
First, notice that $$F_n=frac{1}{6n+1}+frac{10}{6n+2}+frac{100}{6n+3}-frac{37}{6n+4}-frac{37}{6n+5}-frac{37}{6n+6} geq frac{111}{6n+3}-frac{111}{6n+4} > 0.$$
Then, notice that $$F_n leq frac{111}{6n+1}-frac{111}{6n+6}=frac{555}{(6n+1)(6n+6)}.$$
Thus the sum of $F_n$ converges. How can you infer the final result from this?
answered Dec 12 '18 at 21:43
MindlackMindlack
2,32217
2,32217
2
Alternatively, you can write $$F_n = {frac {303264,{n}^{4}+649296,{n}^{3}+471096,{n}^{2}+132516,n+ 11892}{ left( 6,n+1 right) left( 6,n+2 right) left( 6,n+3 right) left( 6,n+4 right) left( 6,n+5 right) left( 6,n+6 right) }} $$ and note that the numerator has degree $4$ and denominator degree $6$, so $F_n = O(1/n^2)$.
– Robert Israel
Dec 12 '18 at 22:09
add a comment |
2
Alternatively, you can write $$F_n = {frac {303264,{n}^{4}+649296,{n}^{3}+471096,{n}^{2}+132516,n+ 11892}{ left( 6,n+1 right) left( 6,n+2 right) left( 6,n+3 right) left( 6,n+4 right) left( 6,n+5 right) left( 6,n+6 right) }} $$ and note that the numerator has degree $4$ and denominator degree $6$, so $F_n = O(1/n^2)$.
– Robert Israel
Dec 12 '18 at 22:09
2
2
Alternatively, you can write $$F_n = {frac {303264,{n}^{4}+649296,{n}^{3}+471096,{n}^{2}+132516,n+ 11892}{ left( 6,n+1 right) left( 6,n+2 right) left( 6,n+3 right) left( 6,n+4 right) left( 6,n+5 right) left( 6,n+6 right) }} $$ and note that the numerator has degree $4$ and denominator degree $6$, so $F_n = O(1/n^2)$.
– Robert Israel
Dec 12 '18 at 22:09
Alternatively, you can write $$F_n = {frac {303264,{n}^{4}+649296,{n}^{3}+471096,{n}^{2}+132516,n+ 11892}{ left( 6,n+1 right) left( 6,n+2 right) left( 6,n+3 right) left( 6,n+4 right) left( 6,n+5 right) left( 6,n+6 right) }} $$ and note that the numerator has degree $4$ and denominator degree $6$, so $F_n = O(1/n^2)$.
– Robert Israel
Dec 12 '18 at 22:09
add a comment |
I presume the pattern $(1, 10, 100, -37, -37, -37)$ continues forever, so this is
$$ sum_{n=1}^infty frac{a_n}{n}$$
where $$ a_n = cases{1 & if $n equiv 1 mod 6$cr
10 & if $n equiv 2 mod 6$cr
100 & if $n equiv 3 mod 6$cr
-37 & if $n equiv 4,5$ or $0 mod 6$cr}$$
Note that $1+10+100 - 3times 37 = 0$. Then the $6m$
-th partial sum
$$ eqalign{S_m &= sum_{n=1}^{6m} frac{a_n}{n}cr
& = sum_{j=0}^m frac{1}{6j+1} +
10 sum_{j=0}^m frac{1}{6j+2} + 100 sum_{j=0}^m frac{1}{6j+3}
- 37 sum_{k=4}^6 sum_{j=0}^m frac{1}{6j+k}cr
&= frac{1}{6} left(Psi(m+1+1/6) - Psi(1/6) + 10 (Psi(m+1+2/6) - Psi(2/6)) + 100 (Psi(m+1+3/6) - Psi(3/6)) - 37 (Psi(m+1+4/6)+Psi(m+1+5/6)+Psi(m+1+6/6)-Psi(4/6)-Psi(5/6)-Psi(6/6))right)cr}$$
and since $Psi(x) = ln(x) + O(1/x)$ as $x to infty$, the sum converges.
In fact, the limit is
$$ frac{64}{3} ln(2) - frac{63}{4} ln(3) +frac{161}{36} pi sqrt{3}$$
How is $Psi$ defined exactly?
– Karlo
Dec 13 '18 at 10:13
1
Also known as the Digamma function. $Psi(x) = dfrac{d}{dx} ln(Gamma(x))$.
– Robert Israel
Dec 13 '18 at 13:28
add a comment |
I presume the pattern $(1, 10, 100, -37, -37, -37)$ continues forever, so this is
$$ sum_{n=1}^infty frac{a_n}{n}$$
where $$ a_n = cases{1 & if $n equiv 1 mod 6$cr
10 & if $n equiv 2 mod 6$cr
100 & if $n equiv 3 mod 6$cr
-37 & if $n equiv 4,5$ or $0 mod 6$cr}$$
Note that $1+10+100 - 3times 37 = 0$. Then the $6m$
-th partial sum
$$ eqalign{S_m &= sum_{n=1}^{6m} frac{a_n}{n}cr
& = sum_{j=0}^m frac{1}{6j+1} +
10 sum_{j=0}^m frac{1}{6j+2} + 100 sum_{j=0}^m frac{1}{6j+3}
- 37 sum_{k=4}^6 sum_{j=0}^m frac{1}{6j+k}cr
&= frac{1}{6} left(Psi(m+1+1/6) - Psi(1/6) + 10 (Psi(m+1+2/6) - Psi(2/6)) + 100 (Psi(m+1+3/6) - Psi(3/6)) - 37 (Psi(m+1+4/6)+Psi(m+1+5/6)+Psi(m+1+6/6)-Psi(4/6)-Psi(5/6)-Psi(6/6))right)cr}$$
and since $Psi(x) = ln(x) + O(1/x)$ as $x to infty$, the sum converges.
In fact, the limit is
$$ frac{64}{3} ln(2) - frac{63}{4} ln(3) +frac{161}{36} pi sqrt{3}$$
How is $Psi$ defined exactly?
– Karlo
Dec 13 '18 at 10:13
1
Also known as the Digamma function. $Psi(x) = dfrac{d}{dx} ln(Gamma(x))$.
– Robert Israel
Dec 13 '18 at 13:28
add a comment |
I presume the pattern $(1, 10, 100, -37, -37, -37)$ continues forever, so this is
$$ sum_{n=1}^infty frac{a_n}{n}$$
where $$ a_n = cases{1 & if $n equiv 1 mod 6$cr
10 & if $n equiv 2 mod 6$cr
100 & if $n equiv 3 mod 6$cr
-37 & if $n equiv 4,5$ or $0 mod 6$cr}$$
Note that $1+10+100 - 3times 37 = 0$. Then the $6m$
-th partial sum
$$ eqalign{S_m &= sum_{n=1}^{6m} frac{a_n}{n}cr
& = sum_{j=0}^m frac{1}{6j+1} +
10 sum_{j=0}^m frac{1}{6j+2} + 100 sum_{j=0}^m frac{1}{6j+3}
- 37 sum_{k=4}^6 sum_{j=0}^m frac{1}{6j+k}cr
&= frac{1}{6} left(Psi(m+1+1/6) - Psi(1/6) + 10 (Psi(m+1+2/6) - Psi(2/6)) + 100 (Psi(m+1+3/6) - Psi(3/6)) - 37 (Psi(m+1+4/6)+Psi(m+1+5/6)+Psi(m+1+6/6)-Psi(4/6)-Psi(5/6)-Psi(6/6))right)cr}$$
and since $Psi(x) = ln(x) + O(1/x)$ as $x to infty$, the sum converges.
In fact, the limit is
$$ frac{64}{3} ln(2) - frac{63}{4} ln(3) +frac{161}{36} pi sqrt{3}$$
I presume the pattern $(1, 10, 100, -37, -37, -37)$ continues forever, so this is
$$ sum_{n=1}^infty frac{a_n}{n}$$
where $$ a_n = cases{1 & if $n equiv 1 mod 6$cr
10 & if $n equiv 2 mod 6$cr
100 & if $n equiv 3 mod 6$cr
-37 & if $n equiv 4,5$ or $0 mod 6$cr}$$
Note that $1+10+100 - 3times 37 = 0$. Then the $6m$
-th partial sum
$$ eqalign{S_m &= sum_{n=1}^{6m} frac{a_n}{n}cr
& = sum_{j=0}^m frac{1}{6j+1} +
10 sum_{j=0}^m frac{1}{6j+2} + 100 sum_{j=0}^m frac{1}{6j+3}
- 37 sum_{k=4}^6 sum_{j=0}^m frac{1}{6j+k}cr
&= frac{1}{6} left(Psi(m+1+1/6) - Psi(1/6) + 10 (Psi(m+1+2/6) - Psi(2/6)) + 100 (Psi(m+1+3/6) - Psi(3/6)) - 37 (Psi(m+1+4/6)+Psi(m+1+5/6)+Psi(m+1+6/6)-Psi(4/6)-Psi(5/6)-Psi(6/6))right)cr}$$
and since $Psi(x) = ln(x) + O(1/x)$ as $x to infty$, the sum converges.
In fact, the limit is
$$ frac{64}{3} ln(2) - frac{63}{4} ln(3) +frac{161}{36} pi sqrt{3}$$
answered Dec 12 '18 at 21:55
Robert IsraelRobert Israel
319k23208458
319k23208458
How is $Psi$ defined exactly?
– Karlo
Dec 13 '18 at 10:13
1
Also known as the Digamma function. $Psi(x) = dfrac{d}{dx} ln(Gamma(x))$.
– Robert Israel
Dec 13 '18 at 13:28
add a comment |
How is $Psi$ defined exactly?
– Karlo
Dec 13 '18 at 10:13
1
Also known as the Digamma function. $Psi(x) = dfrac{d}{dx} ln(Gamma(x))$.
– Robert Israel
Dec 13 '18 at 13:28
How is $Psi$ defined exactly?
– Karlo
Dec 13 '18 at 10:13
How is $Psi$ defined exactly?
– Karlo
Dec 13 '18 at 10:13
1
1
Also known as the Digamma function. $Psi(x) = dfrac{d}{dx} ln(Gamma(x))$.
– Robert Israel
Dec 13 '18 at 13:28
Also known as the Digamma function. $Psi(x) = dfrac{d}{dx} ln(Gamma(x))$.
– Robert Israel
Dec 13 '18 at 13:28
add a comment |
Added for your curiosity but too long for a comment.
Starting from Robert Israel's elegant answer, it is possible to have quite accurate approximations of the partiel sums using the fact that, for large values of $p$ we have
$$Psi (p)=log left({p}right)-frac{1}{2 p}-frac{1}{12 p^2}+frac{1}{120
p^4}+Oleft(frac{1}{p^6}right)$$ making
$$S_m=left(frac{64}{3} ln(2) - frac{63}{4} ln(3) +frac{161}{36} pi sqrt{3}right)-frac{13}{2
m}+frac{23}{3 m^2}-frac{311}{36 m^3}+frac{499}{54 m^4}-frac{36377}{3888
m^5}+Oleft(frac{1}{m^6}right)$$ Below are listed some values
$$left(
begin{array}{ccc}
m & text{approximation} & text{exact} \
2 & 19.691108 & 19.787015 \
3 & 20.259944 & 20.269370 \
4 & 20.565282 & 20.567065 \
5 & 20.768485 & 20.768971 \
6 & 20.914700 & 20.914867 \
7 & 21.025135 & 21.025202 \
8 & 21.111527 & 21.111558 \
9 & 21.180965 & 21.180981
end{array}
right)$$
add a comment |
Added for your curiosity but too long for a comment.
Starting from Robert Israel's elegant answer, it is possible to have quite accurate approximations of the partiel sums using the fact that, for large values of $p$ we have
$$Psi (p)=log left({p}right)-frac{1}{2 p}-frac{1}{12 p^2}+frac{1}{120
p^4}+Oleft(frac{1}{p^6}right)$$ making
$$S_m=left(frac{64}{3} ln(2) - frac{63}{4} ln(3) +frac{161}{36} pi sqrt{3}right)-frac{13}{2
m}+frac{23}{3 m^2}-frac{311}{36 m^3}+frac{499}{54 m^4}-frac{36377}{3888
m^5}+Oleft(frac{1}{m^6}right)$$ Below are listed some values
$$left(
begin{array}{ccc}
m & text{approximation} & text{exact} \
2 & 19.691108 & 19.787015 \
3 & 20.259944 & 20.269370 \
4 & 20.565282 & 20.567065 \
5 & 20.768485 & 20.768971 \
6 & 20.914700 & 20.914867 \
7 & 21.025135 & 21.025202 \
8 & 21.111527 & 21.111558 \
9 & 21.180965 & 21.180981
end{array}
right)$$
add a comment |
Added for your curiosity but too long for a comment.
Starting from Robert Israel's elegant answer, it is possible to have quite accurate approximations of the partiel sums using the fact that, for large values of $p$ we have
$$Psi (p)=log left({p}right)-frac{1}{2 p}-frac{1}{12 p^2}+frac{1}{120
p^4}+Oleft(frac{1}{p^6}right)$$ making
$$S_m=left(frac{64}{3} ln(2) - frac{63}{4} ln(3) +frac{161}{36} pi sqrt{3}right)-frac{13}{2
m}+frac{23}{3 m^2}-frac{311}{36 m^3}+frac{499}{54 m^4}-frac{36377}{3888
m^5}+Oleft(frac{1}{m^6}right)$$ Below are listed some values
$$left(
begin{array}{ccc}
m & text{approximation} & text{exact} \
2 & 19.691108 & 19.787015 \
3 & 20.259944 & 20.269370 \
4 & 20.565282 & 20.567065 \
5 & 20.768485 & 20.768971 \
6 & 20.914700 & 20.914867 \
7 & 21.025135 & 21.025202 \
8 & 21.111527 & 21.111558 \
9 & 21.180965 & 21.180981
end{array}
right)$$
Added for your curiosity but too long for a comment.
Starting from Robert Israel's elegant answer, it is possible to have quite accurate approximations of the partiel sums using the fact that, for large values of $p$ we have
$$Psi (p)=log left({p}right)-frac{1}{2 p}-frac{1}{12 p^2}+frac{1}{120
p^4}+Oleft(frac{1}{p^6}right)$$ making
$$S_m=left(frac{64}{3} ln(2) - frac{63}{4} ln(3) +frac{161}{36} pi sqrt{3}right)-frac{13}{2
m}+frac{23}{3 m^2}-frac{311}{36 m^3}+frac{499}{54 m^4}-frac{36377}{3888
m^5}+Oleft(frac{1}{m^6}right)$$ Below are listed some values
$$left(
begin{array}{ccc}
m & text{approximation} & text{exact} \
2 & 19.691108 & 19.787015 \
3 & 20.259944 & 20.269370 \
4 & 20.565282 & 20.567065 \
5 & 20.768485 & 20.768971 \
6 & 20.914700 & 20.914867 \
7 & 21.025135 & 21.025202 \
8 & 21.111527 & 21.111558 \
9 & 21.180965 & 21.180981
end{array}
right)$$
answered Dec 13 '18 at 4:30
Claude LeiboviciClaude Leibovici
119k1157132
119k1157132
add a comment |
add a comment |
If you also want to calculate the sum of this series there's no need for anything but the series of the complex logarithm
$$
S(z)=-log(1-z)=z+frac{z^2}2+frac{z^3}3+cdots=sum_{n=1}^inftyfrac{z^n}n
$$
evaluated at selected roots of unity $neq1$. This is fine because the series $S(z)$
converges when $|z|le1, zneq1$.
Assume that the sequence $(a_n)_{nge1}$ is periodic with period $L$. Also assume that $a_1+a_2+cdots+a_L=0$. We can then write
$$
sum_{n=1}^inftyfrac{a_n}n
$$
as a linear combination of the series $S(zeta_L^k)$, $k=1,2,ldots,L_1$, with $zeta_L=e^{2pi i/L}$.
The tool for that is the discrete Fourier transform on $Bbb{Z}_L.$ We have the characters
$$chi_j:Bbb{Z}_LtoBbb{C}^*, chi_j(overline{n})=zeta_L^{jn}, n=0,1,ldots,L_1.$$
DFT guarantees that there exists coefficients $c_0,c_1,ldots,c_{L-1}$ such that
for all $n=0,1,ldots,L-1$
$$
a_n=sum_{j=0}^{L-1}c_jchi_j(overline{n}).
$$
More precisely, the inverse Fourier transform gives the formula
$$
c_j=frac1Lsum_{n=0}^{L-1}a_noverline{chi_j}(overline{n})=frac1Lsum_{n=0}^{L-1}a_nzeta_L^{-nj}.
$$
Observe that
$$c_0=frac1L(a_1+a_2+cdots+a_L)=0.$$
This will be important because it implies that the divergent harmonic series is missing in what follows, namely
$$
sum_{n=1}^inftyfrac{a_nz^n}n=frac1Lsum_{j=0}^{L-1}sum_{n=1}^infty frac{c_jzeta_L^{nj}z^n}n=frac1Lsum_{j=0}^{L-1}c_jS(zeta^{j}z)$$
whenever all the series converge.
In the present case $L=6, a_1=1,a_2=10,a_3=100,a_4=a_5=a_6=-37$, so the zero assumption holds (as also pointed out by all the other answerers). A routine calculation gives
$$
begin{aligned}
c_1=overline{c_5}&=frac1{12}(-283-85isqrt3)\
c_2=overline{c_4}&=frac34(21+isqrt3)\
c_3&=-frac{64}3.
end{aligned}
$$
So the sum of this series is
$$
-frac16sum_{j=1}^5c_jlog(1-zeta_6^j).
$$
A similar example. Too similar in fact. Turning this into CW. Likely that the same technique has been used in other answers as well.
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Dec 18 '18 at 19:56
add a comment |
If you also want to calculate the sum of this series there's no need for anything but the series of the complex logarithm
$$
S(z)=-log(1-z)=z+frac{z^2}2+frac{z^3}3+cdots=sum_{n=1}^inftyfrac{z^n}n
$$
evaluated at selected roots of unity $neq1$. This is fine because the series $S(z)$
converges when $|z|le1, zneq1$.
Assume that the sequence $(a_n)_{nge1}$ is periodic with period $L$. Also assume that $a_1+a_2+cdots+a_L=0$. We can then write
$$
sum_{n=1}^inftyfrac{a_n}n
$$
as a linear combination of the series $S(zeta_L^k)$, $k=1,2,ldots,L_1$, with $zeta_L=e^{2pi i/L}$.
The tool for that is the discrete Fourier transform on $Bbb{Z}_L.$ We have the characters
$$chi_j:Bbb{Z}_LtoBbb{C}^*, chi_j(overline{n})=zeta_L^{jn}, n=0,1,ldots,L_1.$$
DFT guarantees that there exists coefficients $c_0,c_1,ldots,c_{L-1}$ such that
for all $n=0,1,ldots,L-1$
$$
a_n=sum_{j=0}^{L-1}c_jchi_j(overline{n}).
$$
More precisely, the inverse Fourier transform gives the formula
$$
c_j=frac1Lsum_{n=0}^{L-1}a_noverline{chi_j}(overline{n})=frac1Lsum_{n=0}^{L-1}a_nzeta_L^{-nj}.
$$
Observe that
$$c_0=frac1L(a_1+a_2+cdots+a_L)=0.$$
This will be important because it implies that the divergent harmonic series is missing in what follows, namely
$$
sum_{n=1}^inftyfrac{a_nz^n}n=frac1Lsum_{j=0}^{L-1}sum_{n=1}^infty frac{c_jzeta_L^{nj}z^n}n=frac1Lsum_{j=0}^{L-1}c_jS(zeta^{j}z)$$
whenever all the series converge.
In the present case $L=6, a_1=1,a_2=10,a_3=100,a_4=a_5=a_6=-37$, so the zero assumption holds (as also pointed out by all the other answerers). A routine calculation gives
$$
begin{aligned}
c_1=overline{c_5}&=frac1{12}(-283-85isqrt3)\
c_2=overline{c_4}&=frac34(21+isqrt3)\
c_3&=-frac{64}3.
end{aligned}
$$
So the sum of this series is
$$
-frac16sum_{j=1}^5c_jlog(1-zeta_6^j).
$$
A similar example. Too similar in fact. Turning this into CW. Likely that the same technique has been used in other answers as well.
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Dec 18 '18 at 19:56
add a comment |
If you also want to calculate the sum of this series there's no need for anything but the series of the complex logarithm
$$
S(z)=-log(1-z)=z+frac{z^2}2+frac{z^3}3+cdots=sum_{n=1}^inftyfrac{z^n}n
$$
evaluated at selected roots of unity $neq1$. This is fine because the series $S(z)$
converges when $|z|le1, zneq1$.
Assume that the sequence $(a_n)_{nge1}$ is periodic with period $L$. Also assume that $a_1+a_2+cdots+a_L=0$. We can then write
$$
sum_{n=1}^inftyfrac{a_n}n
$$
as a linear combination of the series $S(zeta_L^k)$, $k=1,2,ldots,L_1$, with $zeta_L=e^{2pi i/L}$.
The tool for that is the discrete Fourier transform on $Bbb{Z}_L.$ We have the characters
$$chi_j:Bbb{Z}_LtoBbb{C}^*, chi_j(overline{n})=zeta_L^{jn}, n=0,1,ldots,L_1.$$
DFT guarantees that there exists coefficients $c_0,c_1,ldots,c_{L-1}$ such that
for all $n=0,1,ldots,L-1$
$$
a_n=sum_{j=0}^{L-1}c_jchi_j(overline{n}).
$$
More precisely, the inverse Fourier transform gives the formula
$$
c_j=frac1Lsum_{n=0}^{L-1}a_noverline{chi_j}(overline{n})=frac1Lsum_{n=0}^{L-1}a_nzeta_L^{-nj}.
$$
Observe that
$$c_0=frac1L(a_1+a_2+cdots+a_L)=0.$$
This will be important because it implies that the divergent harmonic series is missing in what follows, namely
$$
sum_{n=1}^inftyfrac{a_nz^n}n=frac1Lsum_{j=0}^{L-1}sum_{n=1}^infty frac{c_jzeta_L^{nj}z^n}n=frac1Lsum_{j=0}^{L-1}c_jS(zeta^{j}z)$$
whenever all the series converge.
In the present case $L=6, a_1=1,a_2=10,a_3=100,a_4=a_5=a_6=-37$, so the zero assumption holds (as also pointed out by all the other answerers). A routine calculation gives
$$
begin{aligned}
c_1=overline{c_5}&=frac1{12}(-283-85isqrt3)\
c_2=overline{c_4}&=frac34(21+isqrt3)\
c_3&=-frac{64}3.
end{aligned}
$$
So the sum of this series is
$$
-frac16sum_{j=1}^5c_jlog(1-zeta_6^j).
$$
If you also want to calculate the sum of this series there's no need for anything but the series of the complex logarithm
$$
S(z)=-log(1-z)=z+frac{z^2}2+frac{z^3}3+cdots=sum_{n=1}^inftyfrac{z^n}n
$$
evaluated at selected roots of unity $neq1$. This is fine because the series $S(z)$
converges when $|z|le1, zneq1$.
Assume that the sequence $(a_n)_{nge1}$ is periodic with period $L$. Also assume that $a_1+a_2+cdots+a_L=0$. We can then write
$$
sum_{n=1}^inftyfrac{a_n}n
$$
as a linear combination of the series $S(zeta_L^k)$, $k=1,2,ldots,L_1$, with $zeta_L=e^{2pi i/L}$.
The tool for that is the discrete Fourier transform on $Bbb{Z}_L.$ We have the characters
$$chi_j:Bbb{Z}_LtoBbb{C}^*, chi_j(overline{n})=zeta_L^{jn}, n=0,1,ldots,L_1.$$
DFT guarantees that there exists coefficients $c_0,c_1,ldots,c_{L-1}$ such that
for all $n=0,1,ldots,L-1$
$$
a_n=sum_{j=0}^{L-1}c_jchi_j(overline{n}).
$$
More precisely, the inverse Fourier transform gives the formula
$$
c_j=frac1Lsum_{n=0}^{L-1}a_noverline{chi_j}(overline{n})=frac1Lsum_{n=0}^{L-1}a_nzeta_L^{-nj}.
$$
Observe that
$$c_0=frac1L(a_1+a_2+cdots+a_L)=0.$$
This will be important because it implies that the divergent harmonic series is missing in what follows, namely
$$
sum_{n=1}^inftyfrac{a_nz^n}n=frac1Lsum_{j=0}^{L-1}sum_{n=1}^infty frac{c_jzeta_L^{nj}z^n}n=frac1Lsum_{j=0}^{L-1}c_jS(zeta^{j}z)$$
whenever all the series converge.
In the present case $L=6, a_1=1,a_2=10,a_3=100,a_4=a_5=a_6=-37$, so the zero assumption holds (as also pointed out by all the other answerers). A routine calculation gives
$$
begin{aligned}
c_1=overline{c_5}&=frac1{12}(-283-85isqrt3)\
c_2=overline{c_4}&=frac34(21+isqrt3)\
c_3&=-frac{64}3.
end{aligned}
$$
So the sum of this series is
$$
-frac16sum_{j=1}^5c_jlog(1-zeta_6^j).
$$
answered Dec 18 '18 at 6:52
community wiki
Jyrki Lahtonen
A similar example. Too similar in fact. Turning this into CW. Likely that the same technique has been used in other answers as well.
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Dec 18 '18 at 19:56
add a comment |
A similar example. Too similar in fact. Turning this into CW. Likely that the same technique has been used in other answers as well.
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Dec 18 '18 at 19:56
A similar example. Too similar in fact. Turning this into CW. Likely that the same technique has been used in other answers as well.
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Dec 18 '18 at 19:56
A similar example. Too similar in fact. Turning this into CW. Likely that the same technique has been used in other answers as well.
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Dec 18 '18 at 19:56
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3037247%2fseries-convergence-without-sigma-notation%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Related: 1 and 2
– Mason
Dec 13 '18 at 2:02