MHB How to Derive g(x) from f(x) Using the Möbius Function?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Euge
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving the function g(x) from f(x) using the Möbius function. It presents a mathematical relationship where f(x) is defined as a sum involving g and seeks to express g in terms of f using the Möbius function, μ(n). The correct solution to the problem was provided by a participant named Ackbach. The thread encourages readers to follow specific guidelines for engaging with the Problem of the Week. This mathematical exploration highlights the application of the Möbius function in deriving relationships between functions.
Euge
Gold Member
MHB
POTW Director
Messages
2,072
Reaction score
245
Here is this week's POTW:

-----
Let $f,g : \Bbb R \to \Bbb R$ such that $$f(x) = \sum_{n =1}^{\lfloor x\rfloor} g\left(\frac{x}{n}\right)$$ Show that $$g(x) = \sum_{n = 1}^{\lfloor x\rfloor} \mu(n)\, f\left(\frac{x}{n}\right)$$ where $\mu(n)$ is the Möbius function.-----

Remember to read the https://mathhelpboards.com/showthread.php?772-Problem-of-the-Week-%28POTW%29-Procedure-and-Guidelines to find out how to https://mathhelpboards.com/forms.php?do=form&fid=2!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This week's problem was solved correctly by Ackbach. You can read his solution below.

There is a proof of this on the Möbius Inversion Formula wiki page, but there are a few steps that are lacking in details, so I will add some value there.

First of all, we note that
$$\sum_{d|n}\mu(d)=i(n),$$
where
$$i(n)=\begin{cases}1,&\; n=1\\0,&\;\text{otherwise}\end{cases}.$$

Secondly, we use the Iverson convention that [condition] is the indicator function of the condition, being $1$ if the condition is true, and $0$ if it is false. Also note that we use the convention that if $x$ is a real number, then
$$\sum_{i=1}^xf(i)=\sum_{i=1}^{\lfloor x\rfloor}f(i);$$
that is, the sum is understood to run over integers only, and we round down on the upper end.

Then we expand out the RHS of what we are to prove:
\begin{align*}
\sum_{n=1}^{x}\mu(n)\,f\!\left(\frac{x}{n}\right)
&=\sum_{n=1}^{x}\mu(n)\sum_{m=1}^{x/n}g\!\left(\frac{x}{mn}\right)\qquad \text{(Let $r=mn.$)} \\
&=\sum_{n=1}^{x}\mu(n)\sum_{r=n}^{x}g\!\left(\frac{x}{r}\right).
\end{align*}
Now, we would like to interchange the order of summation, but the problem is that the inner sum currently depends on $n$. If we include the condition $[r==mn],$ we can let the inner sum start at $1:$
\begin{align*}
\sum_{n=1}^{x}\mu(n)\,f\!\left(\frac{x}{n}\right)
&=\sum_{n=1}^{x}\mu(n)\sum_{r=1}^{x}[r==mn]\,g\!\left(\frac{x}{r}\right) \\
&=\sum_{r=1}^{x}g\!\left(\frac{x}{r}\right)\sum_{n=1}^{x}\mu(n)[r==mn] \\
&=\sum_{r=1}^{x}g\!\left(\frac{x}{r}\right)\sum_{n|r}\mu(n) \\
&=\sum_{r=1}^{x}g\!\left(\frac{x}{r}\right)i(r) \\
&=g(x),
\end{align*}
as required.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K