How Can Ramanujan's Identity Simplify Summing Powers of Integers?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter zetafunction
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Identity
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around Ramanujan's identity for summing powers of integers, specifically the formula involving Bernoulli numbers and the Riemann zeta function. Participants explore the implications of this identity, its components, and related summation techniques.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant recalls Ramanujan's formula for summing powers of integers and seeks clarification on its derivation.
  • Another participant questions the meaning of the notation B and the range of k in the summation.
  • A response clarifies that B refers to Bernoulli numbers and suggests that the summation runs from k=0 to infinity.
  • Further clarification is provided that B_2k denotes the 2k-th Bernoulli number and that the summation is finite.
  • One participant mentions the Euler-Maclaurin summation formula as a method used by Ramanujan, expressing confusion about the term \zeta (-r).
  • Another participant explains that the term \zeta (-r) corresponds to \frac{B_{r+1}}{r+1} for positive integer values of r and introduces an alternative formula for computing the sum of powers.
  • A claim is made that one of the Bernoulli brothers could compute large sums of powers quickly using these formulas, contrasting it with the time it might take to do so manually.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding regarding the components of Ramanujan's identity and the implications of the Euler-Maclaurin formula. There is no consensus on the interpretation of the term \zeta (-r) or the derivation of the identity.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about the notation and the specific mathematical steps involved in deriving the identity. The discussion includes assumptions about the properties of Bernoulli numbers and the applicability of the Euler-Maclaurin summation formula.

zetafunction
Messages
371
Reaction score
0
i do not remember the webpage i watched this but i remember that they said ' IN chapter 1 of his notebook Ramanujan wrote '

[tex]\sum_{n=0}^{x}n^{r}= (r+1)^{-1}x^{r+1}+ \zeta (-r) - \sum_{k}B_{2k}\frac{\Gamma (r+1)}{\Gamma (k-2r+2)}[/tex]

does anyone knows how to get this ??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
zetafunction said:
i do not remember the webpage i watched this but i remember that they said ' IN chapter 1 of his notebook Ramanujan wrote '

[tex]\sum_{n=0}^{x}n^{r}= (r+1)^{-1}x^{r+1}+ \zeta (-r) - \sum_{k}B_{2k}\frac{\Gamma (r+1)}{\Gamma (k-2r+2)}[/tex]

does anyone knows how to get this ??

To begin with, what is B? and in the sum what is the range of k?
 
ramsey2879 said:
To begin with, what is B? and in the sum what is the range of k?

A Bernoulli number and "0 to infinity", I believe.
 
oh, excuse me the lack of notation

here B_2k means the 2k-th Bernoulli Number, and yes the summation (is finite) goes to k=0 to k= infinite

i know he used Euler-Maclaurin summation formula but the term [tex]\zeta (-r)[/tex] seems strange to me
 
Last edited:
The "Euler Summation Formula" might give you some insight to why the Bernouli numbers pop up in this formula. The term [tex]\zeta (-r)[/tex] is just [tex]\frac{B_{r+1}}{r+1}[/tex] for a positive integer value of r. Another formula that will compute this sum for a positive integer value of r is :



[tex]f_{r}(x)= \sum_{n=0} ^{x} n^{r} = r\int f_{r-1}dx + xB_{r}[/tex]

where

[tex]f_{1}(x)=\frac{x^2}{2} + \frac{x}{2}[/tex]



I think one of the Bernoulli brothers could calculate [tex]1^{10}+2^{10}+3^{10} + ... 1000^{10}[/tex] in about fifteen minutes using one of these formulas. Try it using just pen and paper and see how long it takes you...
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K