The Basel Problem: A Solid Solution Using Derivatives and Integrals

  • Thread starter Thread starter hover
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on a new solution to the Basel problem that utilizes derivatives and integrals, claiming to be more robust than Euler's original approach. Participants express confusion about the logic behind the manipulation of odd and even integers in the solution. The key point is that every integer can be expressed as an odd number multiplied by a power of 2, allowing the transition from the sum of the reciprocals of odd squares to the sum of all integers. The multiplication by the sum of the reciprocals of the powers of 4 is crucial for deriving the final result. Clarifications provided aim to enhance understanding of this mathematical process.
hover
Messages
342
Reaction score
0
http://www.maa.org/news/howeulerdidit.html"
"[URL
[/URL]
I found a nice solution to the Basel problem on the internet which I am liking very much. It deals with derivatives and integrals and appears to be a much more solid solution to the Basel problem than Euler's original solution. There is just one thing I am having trouble with to understand the solution. I think it is just me being an idiot but I can't understand the end of the second page,

The series on the right is the sum of the reciprocal of the odd squares, tantalizingly close to the Basel problem, and an easy trick makes it into a solution. Any number is the product of an odd number and a power of 2. For odd numbers, the power of 2 is 2^0 . Hence, any square is the product of an odd square and a power of 4. So, Euler multiplies this equation by the sum of the reciprocals of the powers of 4, as follows:

It sounds like garble and I don't get the logic. Can someone explain to me?

Thanks! :smile:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
hover said:
http://www.maa.org/news/howeulerdidit.html"
"[URL
[/URL]
I found a nice solution to the Basel problem on the internet which I am liking very much. It deals with derivatives and integrals and appears to be a much more solid solution to the Basel problem than Euler's original solution. There is just one thing I am having trouble with to understand the solution. I think it is just me being an idiot but I can't understand the end of the second page,

It sounds like garble and I don't get the logic. Can someone explain to me?

Thanks! :smile:

Are you referring to this quote?:

"Any number is the product of an odd number and a power of 2. For odd numbers, the power of 2 is 2^0 . Hence, any square is the product of an odd square and a power of 4. "

All it is saying is that if n is odd, n = 20*n and n2 = 40*n2, which isn't saying much.

If n is even, factor out all factors of 2 so n has the form n = 2pk for some odd integer k. Then n2=22pk2 = 4pk2.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
LCKurtz said:
Are you referring to this quote?:

"Any number is the product of an odd number and a power of 2. For odd numbers, the power of 2 is 2^0 . Hence, any square is the product of an odd square and a power of 4. "

All it is saying is that if n is odd, n = 20*n and n2 = 40*n2, which isn't saying much.

If n is even, factor out all factors of 2 so n has the form n = 2pk for some odd integer k. Then n2=22pk2 = 4pk2.

I'm sorry but I'm still having a hard time understanding. I don't see what the small quote(what I quoted in my first post) is talking about or referring to. The equation above where I quoted says pi^2/8 = ∑ 1/(1+2 k)^2 (n = 0 to infinity). I don't see how euler knows to multiply by 4/3 to get pi^2/6 and solve the Basel problem. :(
 
I would try to answer to your question.
I had the same problems at that point when I read the text for the first time.
I think it can be explained as follows:
Every integer number, let's say 1,2,3,4... can be written as an odd number multiplied for some power of 2. If we take any odd number, let's say 7, we can have 7=7*2^0, 14=7*2^1 and so on.
The point is that if we start from the ensemble of just the odd numbers (1,3,5,7...) we can obtain the whole list of integer numbers by multiplying every term by the ensemble of powers of 2 (1,2,4,8...)
Therefore, to pass from the sum of the reciprocals of the odd squares to the sum of the reciprocal of all the integers we multiply the first sum by the sum of the reciprocal of the powers of 4 (2 squared). This last sum is equal to 3/4.
I hope this will be of some help
 
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...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Back
Top