Can the value of a be solved for in the infinite series convergence equation?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on solving the infinite series equation ∑(cos(14.1347 ln(x))/x^a) = 0 for the variable a. It is suggested that a = 1/2 may be a solution, particularly when using the nearby zero of the Riemann zeta function. The analysis notes that the original series likely converges only for a > 1, indicating that the findings pertain to analytic continuation. A graph generated using Maple code illustrates the relationship. Overall, the conversation highlights the complexity of the equation and the potential for a specific solution.
camilus
Messages
146
Reaction score
0
\sum^{\infty}_{x=1} \frac{cos(14.1347 \ln (x))}{x^{a}} = 0

Is there a way to solve for a? I don't think so but maybe someone here will have an insight as to what to do..
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
This equation is

(1/2)\Re \zeta(a-ui) = 0

for u = 14.1347, where \Re signifies the real part, and \zeta is the Riemann zeta function.

The attached picture shows the graph (I did it without the factor 1/2). The .mw file is the Maple code that generated this picture.

So a=1/2 looks like the solution. If we replace u=14.1347 by the nearby zero of the zeta function u = 14.134725141734693790\cdots then the solution would be exactly a=1/2 of course.

Caveat. Probably the original series converges only for a > 1 , so my analysis applies only to the analytic continuation.
 

Attachments

  • zeta.jpg
    zeta.jpg
    7 KB · Views: 494
  • zeta.mw
    zeta.mw
    29.9 KB · Views: 450
g_edgar said:
This equation is

(1/2)\Re \zeta(a-ui) = 0

for u = 14.1347, where \Re signifies the real part, and \zeta is the Riemann zeta function.

The attached picture shows the graph (I did it without the factor 1/2). The .mw file is the Maple code that generated this picture.

So a=1/2 looks like the solution. If we replace u=14.1347 by the nearby zero of the zeta function u = 14.134725141734693790\cdots then the solution would be exactly a=1/2 of course.

Caveat. Probably the original series converges only for a > 1 , so my analysis applies only to the analytic continuation.


OMG brilliant! Thanks! I realized this a few days ago, and just realized now that I realized it, and it looks a bit clearer now. weird.. but I am not complaining, thanks!
 
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 Pythagorus'
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