19
$\begingroup$

It is well known that $1-\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{3}-\frac{1}{4}+\frac{1}{5}... =\log(2).$
If we consider the array: $T(n,k) = -(n-1)\; \text{ if }\; n|k, \;\text{ else } \;1,$

Starting:

$\displaystyle T = \left( \begin{array}{ccccccc} +0&+0&+0&+0&+0&+0&+0&\cdots \\ +1&-1&+1&-1&+1&-1&+1 \\ +1&+1&-2&+1&+1&-2&+1 \\ +1&+1&+1&-3&+1&+1&+1 \\ +1&+1&+1&+1&-4&+1&+1 \\ +1&+1&+1&+1&+1&-5&+1 \\ +1&+1&+1&+1&+1&+1&-6 \\ \vdots&&&&&&&\ddots \end{array} \right)$


Is it true that $\displaystyle \log(n)=\sum\limits_{k=1}^{\infty}\frac{T(n,k)}{k}$$\;$?

  • 1
    We can see the formula for log(k) in page 136 by Lehmer (1975) http://matwbn.icm.edu.pl/ksiazki/aa/aa27/aa27121.pdf2016-02-04

5 Answers 5

22

You can write $T(n,k)=1-n1_{\{n\mid k\}}$. Then, for $\vert x\vert < 1$ look at the power series $ \begin{align} \sum_{k=1}^\infty\frac{T(n,k)}{k}x^k&=\sum_{k=1}^\infty\frac{x^k}{k}-\sum_{k=1}^\infty1_{\{n\mid k\}}\frac{nx^k}{k}\\ &=\sum_{k=1}^\infty\frac{x^k}{k}-\sum_{k=1}^\infty\frac{x^{nk}}{k}\\ &=-\log(1-x)+\log(1-x^n)\\ &=\log\left(\frac{1-x^n}{1-x}\right)\\ &=\log(1+x+\cdots+x^{n-1}). \end{align}. $ So, letting $x$ increase to 1, $ \lim_{x\uparrow1}\sum_{k=1}^\infty\frac{T(n,k)}{k}x^k=\log n. $ The fact that you can commute this limit with the summation to get $\sum_{k=1}^\infty T(n,k)/k$ follows from the fact the series converges uniformly (over $0 < x < 1$). You can show this by grouping together the consecutive positive terms where $n\nmid k$ to get a sequence with alternating signs and decreasing in magnitude. Then, truncating the series gives an error which is bounded by the following term. That is, $ \left\vert\sum_{k=1}^{jn-1}\frac{T(n,k)}{k}x^k-\log(1+x+\cdots+x^{n-1})\right\vert \le \frac{-T(n,jn)}{jn}x^{jn}\le \frac1j. $ Commuting the limit with a finite sum is no problem, so you get $ \left\vert\sum_{k=1}^{jn-1}\frac{T(n,k)}{k}-\log n\right\vert\le\frac1j. $

  • 4
    Very nice derivation from basic principles.2011-06-20
6

Yes. You can get the sums by differentiating the digamma function repeatedly. There is a good deal of information about the resulting polygamma functions, including series expressions, here. Your matrix version is a lot more visually arresting than the usual Dirac delta function formulation!

  • 0
    After some experimenting, I find that $\sum _{n=0}^{\infty } \left(\frac{x^{2 n+1}}{(2 n+1)^s}-\frac{x^{2 n+2}}{(2 n+2)^s}\right) = 2^{-s} \left(x \Phi \left(x^2,s,\frac{1}{2}\right)-\text{Li}_s\left(x^2\right)\right)$ where $\text{Li}_s\left(x^2\right)$ is the PolyLog function and $\Phi \left(x^2,s,\frac{1}{2}\right)$ is the LerchPhi function. Is this what you meant in your answer above?2013-10-18
1

@Marek,

For me the hint was in http://oeis.org/A097321, from which the numerators for log(3) are 1,1,-2.

Now log(2) having 1, -1

and log(3) having 1, 1, -2

suggests the pattern.

1

The formula seem to be extendable to fractional arguments of the log. The key is to rewrite the formula for $\log(x)$ as difference of two sums but to a common limit. So we can write $ \begin{eqnarray} \log(x) &=& \lim_{n\to \infty} \sum_{k=1}^n {1 \over k} - x\sum_{k=1}^{\lfloor n/x \rfloor} {1 \over x k} \\ &=& \lim_{n\to \infty} \sum_{k=1}^n {1 \over k} - \sum_{k=1}^{\lfloor n/x \rfloor} {1 \over k}\\ &=& \lim_{n\to \infty} \sum_{k=\lfloor n/x \rfloor+1}^n {1 \over k} \end{eqnarray} $ It seems to be a possible improvement to take the mean of the two sums when the initial index is either $ \lfloor n/x \rfloor $ or $ \lfloor n/x \rfloor +1 $ . So the final best (but not too complicated) approximation might be $ \begin{eqnarray} w_n &=& \lfloor n/x \rfloor\\ \log(x) &=& \lim_{n\to \infty} {1\over2w_n} + \sum_{k=w_n+1}^n {1 \over k} \end{eqnarray} $ However, for reasonable digits of precision one needs many many terms, so this might be only of formal interest.
Moreover, maybe the formula in this notation is also known; I vaguely think I've seen series-formulae involving the floor-function in this or related ways...

[update] There is one more...
To think of fractional summation-bounds suggests to consider integration instead of sums. So I tried $ \log(x) = \lim_{n \to \infty} \int_{n/x} ^n \frac 1t dt $ and then even $ \log(x) = \lim_{n \to \infty} \int_n^{nx} \frac 1t dt $ and after that even could let n finite...
and the perfect result (even for small n) $ \log(x) \underset{n \gt 0}{=} \int_n^{nx} \frac 1t dt $ suggests to look into wikipedia to see, who had noticed that first... ;-) and it's nice to see the identity of the integral-definition and the simple reformulation and generalization of your surprising patterns.

1

For computing $log(\frac{p}{q})$ we can take $p$ positive terms from the harmonic series and $n$ negative ones at each step.

$ \log\left(\frac{p}{q}\right)=\sum_{i=0}^\infty \left(\sum_{j=pi+1}^{p(i+1)}\frac{1}{j}-\sum_{k=qi+1}^{q(i+1)}\frac{1}{k}\right) $

Sequence https://oeis.org/A166871 in the OEIS illustrates case $\frac{p}{q}=\frac{3}{2}$

This generalizes by using sequences as summation limits: https://math.stackexchange.com/a/1609512/134791