Stirling's approximation for Gamma functions with a negative argument

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of Stirling's approximation to Gamma functions with negative arguments, specifically in the context of a physics bachelor's thesis related to a supersymmetric lattice model. The original poster presents a function derived from a product over indices and seeks to rewrite it in a more insightful form using Stirling's approximation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to apply Stirling's approximation to a Gamma function with a negative argument and questions how to handle the limitations of the approximation. They explore using the recursion relation for Gamma functions but find themselves returning to the original indexed product.
  • Some participants suggest alternative expressions for the function that may be more suitable for applying Stirling's approximation.
  • One participant introduces Euler's reflection formula as a potential method to manipulate the expression into a more usable form.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, offering different perspectives and potential approaches. There is a sense of collaboration as they share insights and alternative formulations, though no consensus has been reached on a definitive solution.

Contextual Notes

The original poster expresses a challenge with the limitations of Stirling's approximation for negative arguments, which is central to the discussion. The conversation also reflects a mix of mathematical techniques and creative problem-solving strategies being explored.

L. de Pudo
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hi, fellow physicists (to be). This is my first post on the forum, so I hope I get it right. If not so, please let me know :)

introduction to the problem
At the moment I am working on my physics bachelor's thesis at the theoretical department of my university (Amsterdam). My thesis focusses on a certain supersymmetric 1D lattice model, on which spinless fermions can be placed. While working in Mathematica, I found an exact expression for the occupation of sub-levels on the chain of length l (l being the number of sites on the lattice). The expression I found (f(l)), however, is a product over indices, which is not very insightful. My supervisor has asked me to rewrite this (f(l)) into a power of l. To do this, he said that I should use Stirling's approximation.

The problem
The function I found is
\begin{equation}
f(l) = \frac{2}{5} {(-1)}^l \prod_{i=0}^{l-3} \frac{3(l-i)-2}{3(l-i)-1}.
\end{equation}

While being not skilled in rewriting this, Mathematica rewrote f(l) in terms of Gamma functions. leaving out the pre-factors, I am left with
\begin{equation}
f(l)={(-1)}^l \frac{3l-2}{3l-1} \frac{\Gamma(\frac{4}{3}-l)}{\Gamma(\frac{5}{3}-l)}.
\end{equation}

On this expression I wanted to use Sterling's approximation for Gamma functions:
\begin{equation}
\Gamma(z)=\sqrt{\frac{2π}{z}}(\frac{z}{e})^{z}.
\end{equation}
The trouble that arises is that this approximation is only valid for positive arguments z of Gamma.

Attempt to Solve
To solve this, I tried to use the recursion relation

\begin{equation}
\Gamma(z)=\frac{\Gamma(z+1)}{z}
\end{equation}

If I use this recursion relation, however, I'm back at the indexed product I started with.

Does anyone on this forum know of a different approach, some sparks of creativity or otherwise good tips? All help is very welcome.

greetings,

Ludo
 
Physics news on Phys.org


I misspelled 'Stirling' in the title, can an admin maybe change this?
 


There definitely exists an expression which is more handy than the one Mathematica gave you... If you just write out the product, you get
f(l) = \frac{2}{5} (-1)^l \frac{7 \cdot 10 \cdot 13 \cdot ... \cdot (3l-2)}{8 \cdot 11 \cdot 14 \cdot ... \cdot (3l-1)} = (-1)^l \frac{\Gamma(2/3) \Gamma(l+1/3)}{\Gamma(1/3) \Gamma(l+2/3)},
where the last step is from wolfram alpha :) It's difficult to estimate if the two expressions are the same without knowing the prefactors, but this certainly looks more appealing in terms of using Stirling.
 


You can also get your expression into the same form as the one clamtrox posted by use Euler's reflection formula:

\Gamma(1-z) \Gamma(z)=\frac{ \pi }{ \sin( \pi z ) }
 


Thanks, Clamtrox and gabbagabbahey (Gabba as in the music genre?) for the useful comments. With a positive-argument Gamma function, my world is a lot brighter :)
 


You're welcome! (And my handle is taken from the lyrics to a Ramones track)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
95
Views
8K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
3K