Physics Forums Insights
  • Physics
    • Mechanics
    • Thermodynamics
    • Electromagnetism
    • Fluids
    • Optics
    • Particles
    • Quantum
    • Relativity
    • Biophysics
  • Astronomy
    • Astrophysics
    • Cosmology
    • Observing
  • Mathematics
    • Algebra
    • Analysis
    • Geometry
    • Number Theory
    • Probability
  • Computing
    • Programming
    • Electronics
    • Imaging
  • Science Culture
    • Education
    • Careers
    • Philosophy
    • Profiles
    • Trivia
  • Forums
  • Click to open the search input field Click to open the search input field Search
  • Menu Menu
FourierSeries

Using the Fourier Series To Find Some Interesting Sums

December 22, 2016/4 Comments/in Analysis, Mathematics Tutorials/by Svein
📖Read Time: 4 minutes
📊Readability: Moderate (Standard complexity)
🔖Core Topics: itexdtintseriesperiodic

Table of Contents

  • Preliminaries
  • First Series
  • Second Series
  • Third series
  • Summing up
    • More Related Articles


Preliminaries

If f(x) is periodic with period 2p and f’(x) exists and is finite for -π<x<π, then f can be written as a Fourier series:

[itex]f(x)=\sum_{n=-\infty}^{\infty}a_{n}e^{inx} [/itex]

where

[itex]a_{n}=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}f(t)e^{-int}dt [/itex].

We shall also need Parseval’s formula. It says that for such an f we have:

[itex]\parallel f \parallel^{2}=\sum_{n=-\infty}^{\infty}\vert a_{n}\vert^{2} [/itex]

where

[itex]\parallel f \parallel^{2}=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}\vert f(t) \vert ^{2}dt [/itex]

We shall also use the fact that

[itex]\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}e^{-int}dt=0 [/itex]

and

[itex]e^{-in\pi}=(e^{-i\pi})^{n}=(-1)^{n}=(e^{i\pi})^{n}=e^{in\pi} [/itex]

First Series

Let f(x) be periodic with period 2π where f(x) = x for -π<x<π and f(-π)=f(π)=0.  Let us calculate an for n≠0. The easiest way is to use partial integration:

[itex] a_{n}=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}te^{-int}dt =\frac{(-1)^{n}}{2\pi in}(\pi-(-\pi))-\frac{(-1)^{n}}{2\pi in}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}e^{-int}dt=\frac{(-1)^{n}}{in}-0[/itex]

For n=0 we have

[itex]a_{0}=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}tdt =\frac{1}{2\pi}\frac{1}{2}(\pi^{2}-(-\pi)^{2})=0 [/itex]

The only thing left to calculate is

[itex]\parallel f \parallel^{2}=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}t^{2}dt=\frac{1}{2\pi}\cdot\frac{1}{3}(\pi^{3}-(-\pi)^{3})=\frac{\pi^{2}}{3} [/itex]

Applying Parseval’s formula, we get

[itex]\frac{\pi^{2}}{3}=\sum_{n=-\infty}^{-1}\frac{1}{n^{2}}+0+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{n^{2}} [/itex]

Now [itex](-n)^{2}=n^{2} [/itex], so we can merge the two sums on the right:

[itex]\frac{\pi^{2}}{3}=2\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{n^{2}} [/itex]

or

[itex] \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{n^{2}}=\frac{\pi^{2}}{6}[/itex]

which is our first result.

Second Series

Let f(x) be periodic with period 2π where f(x) = x2 for -π≤x≤π. Then

[itex]a_{n}=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}t^{2}e^{-int}dt=\frac{(-1)^{n}}{2\pi in}(\pi^{2}-(-\pi)^{2})-\frac{(-1)^{n}}{2\pi in}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}2te^{-int}dt [/itex]

We have already calculated the difficult part of the last integral under “First Series”, therefore it is easy to find

[itex]a_{n}=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}t^{2}e^{-int}dt=0-\frac{(-1)^{n}}{2\pi in}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}2te^{-int}dt=\frac{2\cdot(-1)^{2n}}{n^{2}}=\frac{2}{n^{2}} [/itex]

For n=0 we have

[itex]a_{0}=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}t^{2}dt =\frac{1}{2\pi}\frac{1}{3}(\pi^{3}-(-\pi)^{3})=\frac{\pi^{2}}{3} [/itex]

The only thing left to calculate is

[itex]\parallel f \parallel^{2}=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}t^{4}dt=\frac{1}{2\pi}\cdot\frac{1}{5}(\pi^{5}-(-\pi)^{5})=\frac{\pi^{4}}{5} [/itex]

Applying Parseval’s formula, we get

[itex]\frac{\pi^{4}}{5}=\sum_{n=-\infty}^{-1}\frac{4}{n^{4}}+\frac{\pi^{4}}{9}+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{4}{n^{4}}[/itex]

Now [itex](-n)^{4}=n^{4} [/itex], so we can merge the two sums on the right:

[itex]\frac{\pi^{4}}{5}-\frac{\pi^{4}}{9}=2\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{4}{n^{4}} [/itex]

Rearranging gives us

[itex] \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{n^{4}}=\pi^{4}\frac{9-5}{2\cdot 4\cdot5\cdot 9}=\frac{\pi^{4}}{90}[/itex]

which is our second result.

Third series

Now it would be obvious to use f(x)=x3, but that function is somewhat problematic around ±π. A better function is f(x) = x3-π2x which is 0 for ±π. Therefore: Let f(x) be periodic with period 2π where f(x) = x3-π2x for -π≤x≤π. Then

[itex] a_{n}=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}(t^{3}-\pi^{2}t)e^{-int}dt=\frac{(-1)^{n}}{2\pi in}((\pi^{3}-\pi^{2}\cdot\pi)-((-\pi)^{3}-(-\pi)^{2}\cdot(-\pi))-\frac{(-1)^{n}}{2\pi in}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}(3t^{2}-\pi^{2})e^{-int}dt[/itex]

[itex]=0-\frac{(-1)^{n}}{2\pi in}\cdot 3\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}t^{2}e^{-int}dt +\frac{(-1)^{n}}{2\pi in}\cdot\pi^{2} \int_{-\pi}^{\pi}e^{-int}dt [/itex]

Now, the last integral is 0 (as mentioned in the preliminaries) and the first is solved in “Second series”. The result is that

[itex]a_{n}=\frac{6}{in^{3}}[/itex]

For n=0 we have

[itex]a_{0}=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}(t^{3}-\pi^{2}t)dt=\vert_{-\pi}^{\pi}(\frac{t^{4}}{4}-\pi^{2}\frac{t^{2}}{2})=0 [/itex]

The only thing left to calculate is

[itex]\parallel f \parallel^{2}=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}(t^{6}-2 \pi^{2}t^{4}+\pi^{4}t^{2}) dt=\frac{1}{2\pi}(2\cdot\frac{\pi^{7}}{7}-2\cdot 2\pi^{2}\frac{\pi^{5}}{5}+2\cdot \pi^{4}\frac{\pi^{3}}{3})=\frac{8\pi^{6}}{105}[/itex]

Applying Parseval’s formula:

[itex]\frac{8\pi^{6}}{105}=\sum_{n=-\infty}^{-1}\frac{36}{n^{6}}+0+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{36}{n^{6}} [/itex]

Now [itex](-n)^{6}=n^{6} [/itex], so we can merge the two sums on the right and rearrange:

[itex]\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{n^{6}}=\frac{1}{2\cdot 36}\cdot\frac{8\pi^{6}}{105}=\frac{\pi^{6}}{945}[/itex]

which is our third result.

Summing up

All the results in this insight are well-known, but the proofs are usually rather obtuse. I just thought that it would be fun to show that a trivial application of Fourier series theory would give the same answers.

Now I expect everybody has understood how to continue with increasing powers of x in f(x).  Who is going to do the next two?

 

 

Svein
Svein

Master’s in Mathematics, Norway. Interested in Network-based time synchronisation.

More Related Articles

  • Investigating Some Euler Sums
  • Computing the Riemann Zeta Function Using Fourier Series
  • Learn an Integral Result from Parseval’s Theorem
  • When Simple Geometry Unveils Deep Math
  • Some Misconceptions on Indefinite Integrals
  • The Analytic Continuation of the Lerch and the Zeta Functions
Tags: Fourier series, infinite series, Tutorial, Undergraduate
Share this entry
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on X
  • Share on WhatsApp
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Reddit
  • Share by Mail
https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/FourierSeries.png 135 240 Svein https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Physics_Forums_Insights_logo.png Svein2016-12-22 19:06:052020-09-16 01:39:05Using the Fourier Series To Find Some Interesting Sums
You might also like
birthcmb A Poor Man’s CMB Primer: The Birth of a Cosmic Background Radiation
magnet Permanent Magnets Explained by Magnetic Surface Currents
physics of reality Quantum Reconstruction & Bell Correlations Explained
magnetism current Symmetry Arguments and the Infinite Wire with a Current
fluid dynamics experiment Video Analysis of Spheres Falling Through Two Liquids
sun_getting_smaller MESSENGER Detects Sun’s Mass Loss and Solar Expansion
4 replies
  1. TheAdmin
    TheAdmin says:
    February 3, 2017 at 12:59 am

    Nice Insight @Svein!

    Log in to Reply
  2. stevendaryl
    stevendaryl says:
    January 1, 2017 at 4:44 pm

    Very nice. I have done similar tricks for evaluating summations, but I didn't know the trick of using Parseval’s formula. My favorite trick is using representations of the Dirac delta function, and that's how I would evaluate [itex]sum frac{1}{n^2}[/itex]. However, it's a lot more convoluted.Start with the representation for the delta function:[itex]delta(x) = frac{1}{2pi} + frac{1}{pi} sum_n cos(nx)[/itex]Now, integrate both sides from [itex]-x[/itex] to [itex]+x[/itex].[itex]sign(x) = frac{x}{pi} + frac{2}{pi} sum_n frac{1}{n} sin(nx)[/itex](where [itex]sign(x) = pm 1[/itex] depending on whether [itex]x>0[/itex] or [itex]x < 0[/itex])Integrate again, this time from [itex]0[/itex] to [itex]x[/itex]:[itex]|x| = frac{x^2}{2pi} + frac{2}{pi} sum_n frac{1}{n^2} (1 – cos(nx))[/itex]Using a trig identity, [itex]1-cos(nx) = 2 sin^2(frac{n}{2} x)[/itex]. So we have:[itex]|x| = frac{x^2}{2pi} + frac{4}{pi} sum_n frac{1}{n^2} sin^2(frac{n}{2} x)[/itex]Now, we set [itex]x = pi[/itex] to get the identity:[itex]pi = frac{pi}{2} + frac{4}{pi} sum_n frac{1}{n^2} sin^2(frac{n}{2} pi) = frac{4}{pi} sum_{odd n} frac{1}{n^2}[/itex]So:[itex]frac{pi}{2} = frac{4}{pi} sum_n frac{1}{n^2} sin^2(frac{n}{2} pi) = frac{4}{pi} sum_{odd n} frac{1}{n^2}[/itex]Drat! The sum on the right side is only over odd values of [itex]n[/itex], because [itex]sin^2(frac{n}{2} pi) = 0[/itex] when [itex]n[/itex] is even. But all is not lost. We can reason as follows:[itex]sum_n frac{1}{n^2} = sum_{odd n} frac{1}{n^2} + sum_{even n} frac{1}{n^2}[/itex]but [itex]sum_{even n} frac{1}{n^2} = sum_{n} frac{1}{(2n)^2} = frac{1}{4} sum_{n} frac{1}{n^2}[/itex]. So we have:[itex]sum_n frac{1}{n^2} = sum_{odd n} frac{1}{n^2} + frac{1}{4}sum_{n} frac{1}{n^2}[/itex]So [itex]sum_{odd n} frac{1}{n^2} = frac{3}{4} sum_n frac{1}{n^2}[/itex]. Putting this back into our result, we have:[itex]frac{pi}{2} = frac{4}{pi} sum_n frac{1}{n^2} sin^2(frac{n}{2} pi) = frac{4}{pi} frac{3}{4} sum_{n} frac{1}{n^2}[/itex]So [itex]sum_n frac{1}{n^2} = frac{pi^2}{6}[/itex]Using Parseval is a lot simpler.

    Log in to Reply
  3. Svein
    Svein says:
    December 26, 2016 at 7:08 am

    [QUOTE="micromass, post: 5651822, member: 205308"]Nice article. I think a follow up could consist of finding a general formula for[tex]sum frac{1}{n^{2p}}[/tex]You can do that with Fourier series too!”Yes – but I thought it best to keep it reasonably simple the first time through.

    Log in to Reply
  4. micromass
    micromass says:
    December 25, 2016 at 11:28 pm

    [QUOTE="Svein, post: 5649952, member: 538805"]Svein submitted a new PF Insights postUsing the Fourier Series To Find Some Interesting SumsContinue reading the Original PF Insights Post.“Nice article. I think a follow up could consist of finding a general formula for[tex]sum frac{1}{n^{2p}}[/tex]You can do that with Fourier series too!

    Log in to Reply

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Popular Articles

  • What Planck Length Is and It’s Common Misconceptions
  • Self-Study High School Math: Best Books & Order to Learn
  • Tensors Explained: Scalars, Vectors, Matrices & Math
  • Android Ringtone Picker with RingtoneManager (Java)
  • Debloating Android Phones: Risks, Myths and Safe Tips
  • Einstein Field Equations Explained: Structure, Solutions, Facts
  • The Physics of Hand-to-Hand Combat: Force, Speed & Leverage
  • Why Math Self-Study Projects Fail (And How to Avoid It)
  • Self-Study Analysis: A Proof-to-Manifolds Roadmap
  • Can We See an Atom?

Physics Forums

  • Classical Physics
  • Atomic and Condensed Matter
  • Quantum Physics
  • Special and General Relativity
  • Beyond the Standard Model
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
  • Cosmology
  • Other Physics Topics

Receive Insights Articles to Your Inbox

Enter your email address:

Blog Information

  • Become a Member!
  • Write for Us!
  • Table of Contents
  • Blog Author List

Popular Topics

black holes (23) classical physics (35) education (23) FAQ (58) General (230) general relativity (23) Graduate (185) gravity (25) Guide (86) interview (49) mathematics (39) mathematics self-study (21) Physicist (26) Quantum Field Theory (34) quantum mechanics (36) quantum physics (24) relativity (40) Special Relativity (22) Tutorial (147) Undergraduate (287)
2026 © Physics Forums, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED - Contact Us - Privacy Policy - About PF Insights
  • Link to X
  • Link to Facebook
  • Link to LinkedIn
Link to: The Schwarzschild Geometry: Physically Reasonable? Link to: The Schwarzschild Geometry: Physically Reasonable? The Schwarzschild Geometry: Physically Reasonable?SchwarzschildGeometry4Link to: Fabry-Perot and Michelson Interferometry: A Fundamental Approach Link to: Fabry-Perot and Michelson Interferometry: A Fundamental Approach inferometerFabry-Perot and Michelson Interferometry: A Fundamental Approach
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top