Need help following a proof

  • Thread starter benorin
  • Start date
  • #1
benorin
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
1,307
108
The paper I am reading is http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/math/pdf/0506/0506319.pdf [Broken] ).

I am trying to follow the proof of Theorem 5.1 [a.k.a. eqn. (53)] on pg. 16. Multiplying (22) by (s-1) and differentiating w.r.t. s at s=1 wouldn't be the same as Corrollary 5.2 since s=1, right? So instead use the limit definition, e.g. using

[tex]\frac{\partial f(1)}{\partial s} = \lim_{s\rightarrow 1} \frac{f(s)-f(1)}{s-1} [/tex]

to compute the derivative, is this the right direction? How does (41) come into play here?

Thanks in advance for getting sucked far enough into my problem to post a reply

-Ben
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Answers and Replies

  • #2
shmoe
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
1,992
1
I haven't read this very thoroughly, but that looks correct on why cor. 5.2 doesn't apply. (22) was only valid when s was not 1.

The limit is the right idea for the derivative. When you multiply by (s-1) in (22), you get an expression for [tex]f(s)=(s-1)\Phi(1,s,u)[/tex] that's valid when s is not 1. At s=1, you define f(1) to be 1 as [tex]\Phi(1,s,u)[/tex] has a simple pole there with residue 1. (41) is

[tex]\lim_{s\rightarrow 1}\frac{(s-1)\Phi(1,s,u)-1}{s-1}[/tex]

which is the derivative of this f(s) at s=1.
 
  • #3
benorin
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
1,307
108
Thank you shmoe! That makes it vividly clear to me.

-Ben
 

Related Threads on Need help following a proof

Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
904
Replies
4
Views
524
  • Last Post
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
680
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
8K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
678
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
2K
Top