Can someone please help me check something.

  • Thread starter uart
  • Start date
  • #1
uart
Science Advisor
2,776
9
Hi, I was reading a derivation over at mathworld.wolfram and I struck something that looks simple enough but I cant quite see it. I think it might be a mistake in the web-page but I'd just like to get second (or 3rd 4th etc) opinion on it.

The page in question is here : http://mathworld.wolfram.com/RiemannZetaFunction.html" [Broken]

I know there's some heavy stuff on that page but trust me that my issue is a fairly simple one. If you scroll down past the preamble and graphs until you come to the numbered equations, the part I have an issue with is in equations 1 through to 7.

Specifically the part where it says "If x is an integer n, then we have the identity" (just after numbered equation 1). In that section from equation 1 through 7 I just can't see anything at all that would require x be restricted to integers. Is it just me or do you think that the page is in error when it suggests that x needs to be an integer here?

Thanks in advance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Answers and Replies

  • #2
dextercioby
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
13,023
576
The integral is valid for all values of "x", the discussion of the infinite sum is specialized for "x" integer, and an integer is commonly denoted by "n".

So i don't see your problem.
 
  • #3
uart
Science Advisor
2,776
9
The integral is valid for all values of "x", the discussion of the infinite sum is specialized for "x" integer, and an integer is commonly denoted by "n".

So i don't see your problem.
Yes I know that the integral is valid for real x (actually x>1), but I don't see why the sum is restricted to integer values of the argument.

Please read it carefully and note that the summation dummy variable (k in that text) has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not the argument of the function (x or n in that text) is integer or otherwise.
 
Last edited:
  • #4
dextercioby
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
13,023
576
On a better reading, you're right, it makes no sense to restrict the discussion to natural values of "x", as it doesn't affect the calculation.
 
  • #5
uart
Science Advisor
2,776
9
That's what I thought. Thanks for verifying it Kurt.
 
  • #6
arildno
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
9,970
132
His name is Daniel, by the way, not Kurt
 
  • #7
uart
Science Advisor
2,776
9
His name is Daniel, by the way, not Kurt
Doh I see it now, Kurt Lewin is the author of one of the quotes in his sig. Blush :blushing:
 
Last edited:

Related Threads on Can someone please help me check something.

Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
21
Views
4K
Replies
15
Views
6K
Top