Resummation of the Harmonic series

  • Thread starter Thread starter yasiru89
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Harmonic Series
Click For Summary
Different summation methods can assign finite values to Cauchy-divergent series, prompting an inquiry into the Harmonic series, specifically whether a similar procedure exists. The connection to the Riemann zeta-function's pole at unity complicates the potential for basic zeta regularization for the Harmonic series. The only known method is the Ramanujan sum, which relates to Euler's constant, but expressing this in terms of other constants has proven challenging. The discussion highlights that while Ramanujan summation can yield a result for the Harmonic series, it ultimately leads back to the definition of Euler's constant. The exploration of deeper zeta-based results or alternative methods remains open.
yasiru89
Messages
107
Reaction score
0
We have different summation senses under which Cauchy-divergent series can be summed to finite values. I was wondering if such a procedure existed for the Harmonic series, \sum_{n = 1}^{\infty} n^{-1}[/tex].<br /> <br /> I&#039;m putting this in the number theory discussion since the obvious connection with the Riemann zeta-function&#039;s pole at unity. However this guarantees there&#039;s no basic zeta regularization to the harmonic- so is there a deeper zeta-based result? Or some other way in which a value might be assigned to it? (the only one I know of is the Ramanujan sum of \gamma[/tex], which is just based on the definition of Euler&amp;#039;s constant in the case of the harmonic- and expressing this in terms of other constants has so far proven futile)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
of course Yasiru since \zeta (1) is infinite the regularization procedure is useless, this is a pain in the neck but can be solved via ramanujan summation

S = \sum_{n=1}^{N}a(n)- \int_{1}^{N} dx a(x)

and taking N--->oo if you set a(n)=1/n (Harmonic series) you would get

\sum_{n=1}^{N}1/n = \gamma (Euler's constant)
 
I wonder though- is that the only one that works for the harmonic? Its not as impressive as it could be since we end up with the definition of Euler's constant as the constant of the series in the Euler-Maclaurin sum formula.
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
6K
Replies
8
Views
11K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
29
Views
2K