How to prove the value of Gamma(1/4)?

  • Thread starter Thread starter bit188
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Value
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving that Gamma(1/4) is approximately equal to 3.625. The Gamma function is defined as Gamma(z) = ∫(0 to ∞) t^(z-1)e^(-t) dt. Users attempted various integration techniques, including integration by substitution and integration by parts, but found them ineffective for obtaining an exact value. It was concluded that Gamma(1/4) cannot be expressed in terms of common transcendental functions, and numerical integration is suggested for approximating its value.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Gamma function and its properties
  • Familiarity with integration techniques, including integration by parts
  • Knowledge of numerical integration methods
  • Basic concepts of transcendental functions
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore numerical integration techniques for approximating Gamma functions
  • Study the properties of the Gamma function in more depth
  • Learn about analytic continuation in complex analysis
  • Investigate the relationship between Gamma functions and special functions
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students studying advanced calculus, and anyone interested in the properties and applications of the Gamma function.

bit188
Messages
45
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Self-given problem; I want to prove that Gamma (1/4) is approxiamately equal to 3.625, but can't seem to integrate it properly...

Gamma(z) = (integral between infinity and 0) (t^z-1)(e^-t) dt
(http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma_function)

Homework Equations


Gamma(n+1) = n Gamma (n)

The Attempt at a Solution


Tried an integration by substitution and an integration by parts, and no luck!

Thanks for your help!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
So you need to integrate
\int_0^\infty t^{-3/4}e^{-t}dt

What do you mean by "approxiamately equal to 3.625". If that is really what you want to get that, then use a numerical integration.
 
2. That is not the only relevant bit of information, but hey, what the heck (it needs to be an analytic continuation).

3. What makes you think anything but a numerical approximation will work?
 
No, I want to get the real value :P

When I do an integration by parts, I get

(-3/4)(t^6/4) + (3/4)(t^-1/2)(e^-t), which is not the right answer...
 
\Gamma\left(\frac{1}{4}\right) cannot be expressed in terms of values of common transcendental functions.
 
Really? Well, I suppose I'd better learn more math, then. >_<

Thanks anyhow!
 
You sure you don't just want it approximately?

Numerical integration would be fine for a few decimal places >.< good enough lol
 
Nah... I'm pretty intrigued by this particular function. I'm interested for nonpractical reasons. Thanks though! ^_^
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K