I Extend Euler Product Convergence Over Primes: Basic Qs

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter benorin
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Euler Product
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on extending the convergence of the Euler product over primes, drawing parallels with the Dirichlet series. The author attempts to establish an analytic continuation of the Euler product by using a completely multiplicative sequence and modifying it to include alternating terms. However, the modified product converges in the same region as the original Euler product, limiting the desired extension. The author questions whether absolute convergence is necessary for achieving the goal of global analytic continuation of the zeta function. The inquiry highlights a need for clarification on the convergence properties of these mathematical constructs.
benorin
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
1,442
Reaction score
191
I would like to extend the convergence of the Euler product over primes, and I tried to do so in the exact manor it was done for the Dirichlet series, namely, given a completely multiplicative sequence ##a( {kj} ) =a(k) \cdot a(j)\text{ and }a(1)=1##, the Dirichlet series ##\xi (s) := \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} \tfrac{a(k)}{k^s}## can be shown (by adding the alternating version of itself to itself and simplifying) to be equal to ## \hat \xi (s) := \left( 1-2^{1-s} a(2) \right) ^{-1} \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} (-1)^k \tfrac{a(k)}{k^s}##, and this series is an analytic continuation of the former.
Tried to do this to the Euler product

$$\sum_{k=1}^{\infty} \tfrac{a(k)}{k^s} = \prod_{k=1}^{\infty} \left( 1+a( {p_k} ) p_k^{-s} + a ( {p_k^2} ) p_k^{-2s}+\cdots \right)=\prod_{k=1}^{\infty} \tfrac{1}{1-a( {p_k} ) p_k^{-s}}$$

(where ##p_k## is the ##k^{th}## prime and the later equality holds only for completely multiplicative sequences ##a(k)## taking a cue from the analytic continuation of the Dirichlet series I set ##a(k) :=(-1)^{k-1}a^{\prime}(k)## where ##a^{\prime}(k)## is a completely multiplicative sequence and the product becomes

$$\sum_{k=1}^{\infty} (-1)^{k-1}\tfrac{a^{\prime}(k)}{k^s} =\prod_{k=1}^{\infty} \tfrac{1}{1-(-1)^{p_k -1}a^{\prime}( {p_k} ) p_k^{-s}} = \tfrac{1}{1+a^{\prime}( {2} ) 2^{-s}}\prod_{k=2}^{\infty} \tfrac{1}{1-a^{\prime}( {p_k} ) p_k^{-s}}$$

I was hoping for an analytic continuation of the product over primes but this product differs from the original Euler product by only one term hence converges in the same region. I had hoped to follow this up with the rest of the steps to globally analytically continue the zeta function and wind up with a product over primes converging for all complex ##s\neq 1## but effecting the convergence of the Dirichlet series the Euler product is equal to didn't effect the convergence of the product itself. I think my problem may be that I need to be working with absolute convergence? Do you understand what I'm trying to do? How can I do that?

Edit: sorry if this is an easy one but I just started on these and I have no text on it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Delta2
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top