What is the Solution to Euler's Constant Riddle?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Tyger
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Constant
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around Euler's Constant (Euler-Mascheroni Constant), specifically exploring its representation as a sum of a series and its classification as either an irrational or transcendental number. Participants delve into mathematical substitutions and series to derive new expressions for the constant.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes a substitution in the limit expression for Euler's Constant, suggesting that replacing ln(n) with ln(n + 1/2) allows for a quicker approach to the limit.
  • The same participant presents a series of transformations leading to a new expression for Euler's Constant, which they claim converges rapidly.
  • Another participant questions whether the final formula converges to the known value of Euler's Constant at ten decimal places and seeks confirmation from others with mathematical software.
  • A different participant asserts that the array converges quickly and suggests that it can be summed row by row, indicating confidence in the correctness of their derived value.
  • One participant expresses uncertainty about whether the proposed formula has been previously discovered and shares a link to a list of known formulas for Euler's Constant.
  • Another participant acknowledges the shared link but claims that their specific formula is new and highlights the significance of the rapid convergence of the asymptote.
  • One participant mentions their own work on a new equation related to 'e' and indicates plans to publish it in the future.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the novelty of the proposed formula and its convergence properties. There is no consensus on whether the formula has been previously established or if it is indeed new.

Contextual Notes

Some participants mention the rapid convergence of the series and the potential for approximation methods, but the discussion does not resolve the mathematical validity or the implications of the proposed substitutions.

Who May Find This Useful

Mathematicians, students of mathematics, and enthusiasts interested in series, constants, and the properties of Euler's Constant may find this discussion relevant.

Tyger
Messages
388
Reaction score
0
In Mathematics a little substitution can work wonders. I'm going to show you how to solve a 150 year old riddle by using a little substitution.

Euler's Constant (Euler-Macheroni Constant), represented by γ value .5772156649 has left mathematicians with two perplexing questions. Can it be represented as the sum of a series, and is it an irrational or transcendental number?

Normally γ is represented as the limit of this expression:

(a) 1 + 1/2 + 1/3 ... +1/n − ln(n)

however note that if we replace ln(n) with ln(n + 1/2)

the limiting value is approaced much more quickly. In fact any other substitution e.g. 2/5 or 3/5 doesn't approach the limit as rapidly. This turns out to have crucial significance for finding the answer for it allows us to change (a) so that each term in the harmonic series corresponds to a term in another series. This will result in γ being represented as the difference between an infinite series and an infinite array, which answers our first question. Here is how each term appears:

(b) 1/n − ln(n + 1/2) + ln(n −1/2) which equals

(c) 1/n − ln{(n −1/2)/(n + 1/2)}

using the standard series for ln(x/y) which is

(d) 2Σ {1/(2m + 1)}[(x − y)/(x + y)]^2m + 1, for m = 0 and up.

Substituting for x and y and including the harmonic series term

(e) 1/n − 2Σ{1/(2m + 1)}(1/2n)^2m + 1

but note that the harmonic series term and the first term of the logarithmic series cancel. Also for n = 0 we have to add ln(2) so our final expression for the value of γ is
Σ
(f) ln(2) − 2ΣΣ {1/(2m + 1)}(1/2n)^2m + 1 for m =1 and up and n = 1 and up.

Despite the fact that the array is two dimensional it converges rapidly. I haven't bothered to try to prove if it is irrational or transcendental, the former can be seen to be true almost by inspection, the latter should not be difficult to prove. I'm sure some young able-brained math whiz will have no trouble with it.
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
the former can be seen to be true almost by inspection

If you can see things like this by inspection, then you stand to become a very rich mathematician.
 
What I want to know is, does that final formula converge to .5772156649 (at ten place accuracy). Anybody got some math software that will do the sums?
 
As I said

the array converges very rapidly so that a few minutes with a pocket calculator will get good accuracy. Also each row of the array is a logarithmic expression minus the harmonic term, so it can be summed row by row. It's also possible to appproximate the remainder of the array. These are all methods that were used before they had math programs.

In any case barring some clerical error on my part, it does give the correct value for Euler's Constant.
 
Brad, that is a very good link

but no I didn't see either formula there, the assymtotic form with n+1/2 or the series and array derived from it. I am convinced that this is new. Still amazing how many ways of deriving it without quite hitting the jackpot, so to speak. I actually found it quite a few years ago and am surprized that no one else seems to have. But it isn't very obvious, it required that I recognize that there was special significance to the rapidity with which assymtote converged.
 
That's cool stuff. Sort of like my new 'e' equation, but I won't put it here. I'll publish it in about 2-4 years once I get a degree and I can get a formal proof.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
779
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K