3

Can someone come up with a proof for this little theorem?

Suppose that $F_a(s)$ is a Dirichlet series and $a(n)$ is its associated arithmetic function, that is:

$$F_a(s)=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{a(n)}{n^s}$$

Then the $a(n)$ are given by:

\begin{equation} \label{eq:a(n)} \nonumber a(n)=-2\sum_{i=0}^{\infty} (-1)^{i}(2\pi n)^{2i}\sum_{j=0}^{i}\frac{(-1)^j (2\pi)^{-2j}F_a(2j)}{(2i+1-2j)!} \end{equation}

The advantage of this formula is that if you know $F_a(s)$ at the even integers, you know the coefficients of its series expansion.


Let me give an example, before questions rain down asking for clarification.

We know that: $$\frac{1}{\zeta(s)}=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{\mu(n)}{n^s}$$ where $\mu(n)$ is the Mobius function. Therefore: $$\mu(n)=-2\sum_{i=0}^{\infty} (-1)^{i}(2\pi n)^{2i}\sum_{j=0}^{i}\frac{(-1)^j (2\pi)^{-2j}\zeta(2j)^{-1}}{(2i+1-2j)!}$$

Now, one good application of this formula is the generalization of the Mobius function. Whatever the $k$, real or complex, positive or negative, we have by definition that: $$\zeta(s)^{-k}=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{\mu_k(n)}{n^s}$$ and you may ask, what is the $\mu_k(n)$ for each $n$ that satisfies the above equation?

Well, they are given by: $$\mu_k(n)=-2\sum_{i=0}^{\infty} (-1)^{i}(2\pi n)^{2i}\sum_{j=0}^{i}\frac{(-1)^j (2\pi)^{-2j}\zeta(2j)^{-k}}{(2i+1-2j)!}$$

An example:

$\sqrt{\zeta(s)}=1+\frac{1}{2\cdot 2^s}+\frac{1}{2\cdot 3^s}+\frac{3}{8\cdot 4^s}+\frac{1}{2\cdot 5^s}+\frac{1}{4\cdot 6^s}+\frac{1}{2\cdot 7^s} +\frac{5}{16\cdot 8^s} +\frac{3}{8\cdot 9^s}+\frac{1}{4\cdot 10^s}+\frac{1}{2\cdot 11^s}+\cdots\\$

Another example, the Von Mangoldt function divided by the log is given by:

$$\frac{\Lambda(n)}{\log n}=-2\sum_{i=0}^{\infty} (-1)^{i}(2\pi n)^{2i}\sum_{j=0}^{i}\frac{(-1)^j (2\pi)^{-2j}\log\zeta(2j)}{(2i+1-2j)!}\\$$

  • This should be made precise first. (What is $F_a(0)$ for $a(n)\equiv 1$?..) – metamorphy May 18 '19 at 05:14
  • Your question doesn't make sense. $F_a(0)=\sum_{n}a(n)$, which stems from the definition of a Dirichlet series. –  May 18 '19 at 05:17
  • I gave an example, it should be easier to understand now. Have a look. –  May 18 '19 at 05:31
  • If $a(n)=1$ always, then $F=\zeta$ function. And in that case, $\zeta(0)=-1/2$. Hope you're happy now. –  May 18 '19 at 05:36
  • 1
    Then you're talking about $F_a(s)$ as the analytic continuation of the series, and thus require it to exist at $s\in\Bbb{Z}_{\geqslant 0}$ (it may not, as these results on natural boundaries indicate). That's exactly what I'm asking for - what are the premises to prove the formula under? – metamorphy May 18 '19 at 06:13
  • I've tried to gather a basic result in my answer below... – metamorphy May 18 '19 at 13:20
  • 1
    Not really, if you drop i=0 and j=0 the formula still holds. To make it more interesting, I will edit the OP to show a generalization of the Mobius function. –  May 18 '19 at 15:56
  • But I see your point, it's interesting that the formula works even when it touchs points that are only defined by analytic continuation, but in the case of zeta it works both with $\zeta(0)$ and without $\zeta(0$, if you remove $i=0$ and $j=0$. I provided the generalization. –  May 18 '19 at 16:03
  • 2
    I upvoted your question, it fits perfectly the requirements of MSE. It is still unobvious to me how you came with that formula without knowing the proof ($\sum_{j=0}^{i}\frac{(-1)^j(2\pi m)^{-2j}}{(2i+1-2j)!}$ are the Taylor series coefficients of $\frac{1}{1-x^2} \frac{\sin(2\pi x/m)}{2\pi x/m}$) – reuns May 18 '19 at 17:23
  • Thanks reuns. I have a paper that I uploaded to the arXiv. Once it's approved, I will post the link here in a comment (I don't want to write an answer.) I didn't create this theorem with a lot of rigor, so it's possible that it requires some touch ups. I might have said that the series need to converge, what happens when F doesn't converge somewhere, etc. –  May 18 '19 at 17:52
  • Regarding $\mu_k$ (I thought I saw it somewhere...) - looks interesting, though for computations I would prefer the recurrence $$\mu_k(n)=\sum_{d\mid n,\ d\neq n}\Big(k-(k+1)\frac{l(d)}{l(n)}\Big)\mu_k(d),$$ where $l$ is any nonzero completely additive function (i.e. such that $l(mn)=l(m)+l(n)$ and $l(n)\neq 0$ for $n\neq 1$); for example, $l(n)=\ln n$ or $l(n)=\Omega(n)$ can be taken. – metamorphy May 18 '19 at 17:54
  • @metamorphy Does that formula work for any $k$, $n$? The power series works for any $k$, $n$, and any function, not just zeta powers. I also used it to create a power series for $\pi(x)$. –  May 18 '19 at 17:58
  • @JRSousa Yes, it does (and there is a similar formula for "powering" an arbitrary Dirichlet series). – metamorphy May 18 '19 at 18:00
  • 1
    @metamorphy A last comment, your formula for $\mu_k(n)$ can't possibly work for complex $n$, right? It seems to require integer $n$. –  May 19 '19 at 05:49
  • @reuns These is the formula that enabled me to create a power series for $\pi(x)$, if you remember the other topic. The formula is unimpressive but was only made possible through this new result. –  May 19 '19 at 20:58

3 Answers3

1

First let's prove this for $$a(n)=\delta_{m,n}=\begin{cases}1,&n=m\\0,&n\neq m\end{cases}$$ with a (fixed) positive integer $m$. Consider the RHS of the formula, $$A_{m,n}=-2\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}(-1)^i(2\pi n)^{2i}\sum_{j=0}^{i}\frac{(-1)^j(2\pi m)^{-2j}}{(2i+1-2j)!}.$$ Replacing $j$ by $i-j$ in the inner sum, we get $$A_{m,n}=-2\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}\Big(\frac{n}{m}\Big)^{2i}\sum_{j=0}^{i}\frac{(-1)^j(2\pi m)^{2j}}{(2j+1)!}.\tag{1}\label{eq1}$$ Since $\displaystyle\sum_{j=0}^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^j(2\pi m)^{2j}}{(2j+1)!}=\frac{\sin 2\pi m}{2\pi m}=0$, this implies $$A_{m,n}=2\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}\Big(\frac{n}{m}\Big)^{2i}\sum_{\color{blue}{j=i+1}}^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^j(2\pi m)^{2j}}{(2j+1)!}=2\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}\Big(\frac{n}{m}\Big)^{2i}\sum_{\color{blue}{j=i}}^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^j(2\pi m)^{2j}}{(2j+1)!}$$ which, after replacing $j$ with $i+j$, gives $$A_{m,n}=2\sum_{i,j=0}^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^{i+j}(2\pi)^{2i+2j}n^{2i}m^{2j}}{(2i+2j+1)!}.\tag{2}\label{eq2}$$ In particular, $A_{m,n}=A_{n,m}$. Now if $n<m$ then we can change the order of summation in $\eqref{eq1}$: $$A_{m,n}=-2\sum_{j=0}^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^j(2\pi m)^{2j}}{(2j+1)!}\sum_{i=j}^{\infty}\Big(\frac{n}{m}\Big)^{2i}=-2\Big(1-\frac{n^2}{m^2}\Big)^{-1}\frac{\sin 2\pi n}{2\pi n}=0,$$ and if $n=m$ then, collecting terms in $\eqref{eq2}$ with $i+j=k$, we obtain $$A_{n,n}=2\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^k(2\pi n)^{2k}}{(2k+1)!}(k+1)=\cos 2\pi n+\frac{\sin 2\pi n}{2\pi n}=1.$$ Concluding, we have $A_{m,n}=\delta_{m,n}$, and this finishes the proof for $a(n)=\delta_{m,n}$.


Essentially, we've proven the formula for functions $a(n)$ such that $\{n:a(n)\neq 0\}$ is finite. It's also easy to see that the formula holds when $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}a(n)$ converges absolutely: the triple sum $$\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}(-1)^i(2\pi n)^{2i}\sum_{j=0}^{i}\frac{(-1)^j(2\pi)^{-2j}}{(2i+1-2j)!}\sum_{\color{blue}{m=n+1}}^{\infty}\frac{a(m)}{m^{2j}}$$ converges absolutely in this case, so we can change the order of summation, but each of the sums with a fixed value of $m$ equals $0$ as already proven; so the entire sum is $0$, and we're left with $\sum_{m=1}^{n}$, which again has been treated already.

Further results require analytic continuation. This can be done as usual (beginning with application of the above to $\bar{a}(n)=n^{-s}a(n)$ with $\Re s>\sigma$ the abscissa of absolute convergence of $F_a(s)$), but behaviour of the series in the RHS of the formula needs to be explored separately.

metamorphy
  • 44,378
0

This proof is simple:

\begin{equation} \nonumber -2\sum_{i=0}^{\infty} (-1)^{i}(2\pi n)^{2i}\sum_{j=0}^{i}\frac{(-1)^j (2\pi)^{-2j}F_a(2j)}{(2i+1-2j)!} \Rightarrow \end{equation} \begin{equation} \nonumber -2\sum_{i=0}^{\infty} (-1)^{i}(2\pi n)^{2i}\sum_{j=0}^{i}\frac{(-1)^j (2\pi)^{-2j}}{(2i+1-2j)!}\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\frac{a(k)}{k^{2j}} \Rightarrow \end{equation} \begin{equation} \nonumber \sum_{k=1}^{\infty}a(k)\left(-2\sum_{i=0}^{\infty} (-1)^{i}(2\pi n)^{2i}\sum_{j=0}^{i}\frac{(-1)^j (2\pi)^{-2j}k^{-2j}}{(2i+1-2j)!}\right)\\ \end{equation} The theorem then follows from the following equation: \begin{equation} \nonumber -2\sum_{i=0}^{\infty} (-1)^{i}(2\pi n)^{2i}\sum_{j=0}^{i}\frac{(-1)^j (2\pi k)^{-2j}}{(2i+1-2j)!}=\begin{cases} 1, & \text{if}\ n=k\\ 0, & \text{otherwise}\\ \end{cases} \end{equation} And the above equation is justified for being the convolution of $\mu_0(n)$ (which is the same as $\delta_{n1}$) and the associated function of the series $k^{-s}$, $b(n)$, since from the convolution formula: \begin{equation} \nonumber c(n)=(\mu_0*b)(n)=\sum_{d|n}\mu_0(d) b\left(\frac{n}{d}\right)=b(n)=\begin{cases} 1, & \text{if}\ n=k\\ 0, & \text{otherwise} \end{cases} \end{equation}

0

This answer assumes the following definitions where $\tilde{f}_a(x)$ and $\tilde{f}_a'(x)$ are used to refer to analytic representations of $\sum\limits_{n}a(n)\,\theta(x-n)=\underset{\epsilon\to 0}{\text{lim}}\frac{f_a(x-\epsilon)+f_a(x+\epsilon)}{2}$ and it's first-order derivative $\sum\limits_{n}a(n)\,\delta(x-n)$ where $\theta(x)$ is the Heaviside step function and $\delta(x)$ is the Dirac delta function.


$$f_a(x)=\sum\limits_{n=1}^x a(n)\tag{1}$$

$$F_a(s)=s\int\limits_0^\infty f_a(x)\,x^{-s-1}\,dx=\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\frac{a(n)}{n^s}\,,\quad\Re(s)\ge 2\tag{2}$$


$$\tilde{f}_a'(x)=\underset{\substack{K,f\to\infty \\ K\gg f\,x}}{\text{lim}}\left(-4 f\sum\limits_{k=1}^K (-1)^k\ x^{2 k}\sum\limits_{j=1}^k \frac{(-1)^j\ (2 \pi f)^{2(k-j)}\ F_a(2 j)}{(2 k-2 j+1)!}\right)\tag{3}$$

$$\tilde{f}_a(x)=\underset{\substack{K,f\to\infty \\ K\gg f\,x}}{\text{lim}}\left(-4 f \sum\limits_{k=1}^K \frac{(-1)^k\ x^{2 k+1}}{2 k+1} \sum\limits_{j=1}^k\frac{(-1)^j\ (2 \pi f)^{2 (k-j)}\ F_a(2 j)}{(2 k-2 j+1)!}\right)\tag{4}$$


Partial evaluation of formula (3) for $\tilde{f}_a'(x)$ at a finite valuation frequency $f\in\mathbb{Z}_{>0}$ leads to the following analytic formula for $a(n)$. The OP's formula uses the evaluation frequency $f=1$, but also includes some additional terms that affect the evaluation at $x=0$ but not at other integer values of $x$.


$$\tilde{a}(x)=\frac{1}{2\,f}\tilde{f}_a'(x)\tag{5}$$


For the cases $a(n)=1$, $a(n)=(-1)^{n-1}$ and $a(n)=\delta_{n-1}$ where $F_a(s)=\zeta(s)$, $F_a(s)=\eta(s)$, and $F_a(s)=1$, formulas (3) and (4) above are simply the power series for the functions defined in formulas (6) to (11) below. This proves the validity of formulas (3) and (4) above for these particular cases, but I believe formulas (3) and (4) are more generally applicable to any definition of $a(n)$ for which the Dirichlet series $F_a(s)=\sum\limits_n\frac{a(n)}{n^s}$ converges for $\Re(s)\ge 2$. All formulas below are for $x\ge 0$, but $\tilde{f}_a'(x)$ and $\tilde{f}_a'(x)$ are actually even and odd functions respectively.


$\quad a(n)=1 \text{ where } F_a(s)=\zeta(s)$:

$$\tilde{f}_a'(x)=\sum\limits_n\delta(x-n)=\underset{f\to\infty}{\text{lim}}\left(-\frac{\sin (2 f \pi x)}{\pi x}+\sum\limits_{n=1}^f (\cos(2 n \pi x)+\cos(2 (n-1) \pi x))\right)\tag{6}$$

$$\tilde{f}_a(x)=\sum\limits_n\theta(x-n)=\underset{f\to\infty}{\text{lim}}\left(-\frac{\text{Si}(2 f \pi x)}{\pi}+\sum\limits_{n=1}^f \left(\frac{\sin(2 n \pi x)}{2 n \pi}+x\ \text{sinc}(2 (n-1) \pi x)\right)\right)\tag{7}$$


$\quad a(n)=(-1)^{n-1} \text{ where } F_a(s)=\eta(s)$:

$$\tilde{f}_a'(x)=\sum\limits_n (-1)^{n-1}\delta(x-n)=\underset{f\to\infty}{\text{lim}}\left(\frac{\sin(2 f \pi x)}{\pi x}-2 \sum\limits_{n=1}^f \cos((2 n-1) \pi x)\right)\tag{8}$$

$$\tilde{f}_a(x)=\sum\limits_n (-1)^{n-1}\theta(x-n)=\underset{f\to\infty}{\text{lim}}\left(\frac{\text{Si}(2 f \pi x)}{\pi }-\frac{2}{\pi}\sum\limits _{n=1}^f \frac{\sin ((2 n-1) \pi x)}{2 n-1}\right)\tag{9}$$


$\quad a(n)=\delta_{n-1} \text{ where } F_a(s)=1$:

$$\tilde{f}_a'(x)=\delta(x-1)=\underset{f\to\infty}{\text{lim}}\left(\frac{\sin(2 f \pi (x+1))}{\pi (x+1)}+\frac{\sin(2 f \pi (x-1))}{\pi (x-1)}\right)\tag{10}$$

$$\tilde{f}_a(x)=\theta(x-1)=\underset{f\to\infty}{\text{lim}}\left(\frac{\text{Si}(2 f \pi (x+1))+\text{Si}(2 f \pi (x-1))}{\pi }\right)\tag{11}$$


Figures (1) to (3) below illustrated formulas (7), (9), and (11) above in orange overlaid on the corresponding blue reference function where all three formulas are evaluated at $f=10$. The red discrete portion of the three figures below represent the evaluation of the three formulas at integer values of $x$. Note that formulas (7) and (9) illustrated in Figures (1) and (2) below both evaluate to $0$ at $x=0$ which is atypical of the Fourier series related to these functions. This is because formulas (6) and (8) are both missing a tooth of a Dirac comb at $x=0$.


Illustration of formula (7)

Figure (1): Illustration of formula (7) for $\tilde{f}_a(x)=\sum\limits_n\theta(x-n)$


Illustration of formula (9)

Figure (2): Illustration of formula (9) for $\tilde{f}_a(x)=\sum\limits_n (-1)^{n-1}\theta(x-n)$


Illustration of formula (11)

Figure (3): Illustration of formula (11) for $\tilde{f}_a(x)=\theta(x-1)$


Formulas (6) to (9) above lead to the following formulas for the Riemann zeta function $\zeta(s)$ and Dirichlet eta function $\eta(s)$. Formulas (12) and (13) for $\zeta(s)$ and $\eta(s)$ can also be used to derive formulas for $\zeta(s)$ and $\eta(s)$ which converge for $\Re(s)>-1$.


$$\zeta(s)=\underset{f\to\infty}{\text{lim}}\left(2^s \pi^{s-1} \sin\left(\frac{\pi s}{2}\right) \Gamma(1-s) \left(-\frac{f^s}{s}+\frac{1}{2} \left(1+\sum\limits_{n=2}^f \left(n^{s-1}+(n-1)^{s-1}\right)\right)\right)\right),\ \Re(s)<2\tag{12}$$

$$\eta(s)=\underset{f\to\infty}{\text{lim}}\left(2 \pi^{s-1} \sin\left(\frac{\pi s}{2}\right)\ \Gamma(1-s) \left(\frac{2^{s-1} f^s}{s}-\sum\limits_{n=1}^f (2 n-1)^{s-1}\right)\right),\ \Re(s)<2\tag{13}$$


Figure (4) below illustrates formula (13) for $\eta(s)$ evaluated at $f=100$ and $f=1000$ in orange and green overlaid on the blue reference function.


Illustration of formula (13) for eta(s)

Figure (4): Illustration of formula (13) for $\eta(s)$ evaluated at $f=100$ and $f=1000$ (orange and green)


Figure (5) and (6) below illustrate the real and imaginary parts of formula (13) for $\eta(s)$ evaluated along the critical line $s=\frac{1}{2}+i\,t$ in orange overlaid on the blue reference function where formula (13) is evaluated at $f=1000$ for both figures. The red discrete portion of the two figures below represent the evaluation of formula (13) at the first ten non-trivial zeta zeros in the upper-half plane.


Illustration of real part of formula (13) for eta(1/2+i t)

Figure (5): Illustration of real part of formula (13) for $\eta(\frac{1}{2}+i\,t)$


Illustration of imaginary part of formula (13) for eta(1/2+i t)

Figure (6): Illustration of imaginary part of formula (13) for $\eta(\frac{1}{2}+i\,t)$

Steven Clark
  • 9,389