What is the Operator Method for Deriving the Euler-Maclaurin Formula?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter DarkNess_wtc
  • Start date Start date
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
14 replies · 4K views
DarkNess_wtc
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
i have thought about that for serval days= =

please help



attachment.php?attachmentid=23523&stc=1&d=1265280816.jpg
 

Attachments

  • Noname.jpg
    Noname.jpg
    5.9 KB · Views: 611
Physics news on Phys.org
It is 35.565955205923352

But I can't tell you about [tex]\sum_{2}^{n} \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}.[/tex]
 
how about steps?
 
Just entered into the calculator.
 
...

i want solving it without cal
 
In what form do u want the answer.
you can approximate the sum by integral 1/sqrt(n) between 1 and 19.
notice that 19^2 is 361
that is 2(19-1) = 36
The answer is close enough
 
>that is 2(19-1) = 36

HOW come to this step?
 
[tex]\sum_{1}^{361} \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}[/tex]
is approximately equal to
[tex]\int_{1}^{361} \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}.[/tex] =[tex]2(\sqrt{a}-\sqrt{b})[/tex]
=[tex]2(\sqrt{361}-\sqrt{1})[/tex]
=36
 
Last edited:
Why do you think there is any answer better than 35.565955205923352 ??
 
I don't think there's an analytical solution, but you can approximate it.
First approximation is integral,

Next approximations would involve some play with operators.

Let's define [tex]D\equiv \frac{d}{dx}[/tex] as the derivative operator, and observe the operator [tex]\sigma \equiv e^{D}[/tex]

Functions of operators are defined via their Taylor Series, so:

[tex]e^{D} f=\sum^{\infty}_{k=0}\frac{D^{k}f(x)}{k!}=\sum^{\infty}_{k=0}\frac{1}{k!}\frac{d^{k}f(x)}{dx^{k}}(x+1-x)^k=f(x+1)[/tex]

(Notice that the last sum is the Taylor Series of f(z) around the point x)

So [tex]\sigma[/tex] is some sort of a delay\shift operator.

Let's now observe the operator S defined as

[tex]F(n)=Sf=\sum^{n}_{k=1}f(k)[/tex]

You can notice that [tex]\sigma Sf=\sum^{n+1}_{k=1}f(k)[/tex]

So [tex]\sigma S f-Sf=f(n+1)=\sigma f[/tex]

And conclude [tex]S(\sigma -1)=\sigma[/tex]

And if you recall the definition of [tex]\sigma[/tex] then:

[tex]S=(1-\sigma^{-1})^{-1}=\frac{1}{1-e^{-D}}[/tex]

[tex]S(D-\frac{D^{2}}{2}+\frac{D^{3}}{6}-...)=1[/tex]

Knowing the expansion of the exponential function, you can approximate the Taylor expansion of S. The interesting fact is that S has a simple pole at "D=0", which means that in the expansion of S you will have a negative power of D:

[tex]S=D^{-1}+...[/tex]

Which means that integration (the inverse of D) is the first approximation to discrete summation.

A better approximation would be

[tex]S=D^{-1}+\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{4}D[/tex]

Operate S on [tex]\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}[/tex]
And get:

[tex]\sum^{n}_{k=2}\frac{1}{\sqrt{k}}=\int^{n}_{k=2}\frac{dk}{\sqrt{k}}+\frac{1}{2\sqrt{n}}-\frac{1}{8n\sqrt{n}}[/tex]

And after some tiresome calculation for n=361

[tex]=35.1977[/tex]

Which I think is a pretty good approximation, if only to show that the operator thing is correct.
Taking further derivatives would make a better approximation.
 
You can also use the first 5 terms of the http://planetmath.org/encyclopedia/EulerMaclaurinSummationFormula.html" (i.e. the integral, the terms involving the first derivative, and the terms involving the second derivative) to approximate the sum as follows :

[tex] S_n = \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{1}{\sqrt{i}}\approx 2\sqrt{n} +\frac{1}{2\sqrt{n}} - \frac{1}{24n\sqrt{n}} -<br /> \frac{35}{24} [/tex]

The result is then :

[tex] S_{361} \approx 36.56797638[/tex]

The error relative to the true result is about 0.0055%.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As stated in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernoulli_numbers" if the first Bernoulli number is chosen according to the convention [tex]B_1 = -1/2[/tex] then the Euler–MacLaurin formula is :

[tex] \sum\limits_{a\leq k<b}f(k)=\int_a^b f(x)\,dx \ + \sum\limits_{k=1}^m \frac{B_k}{k!}\left(f^{(k-1)}(b)-f^{(k-1)}(a)\right)+R(f,m). [/tex]

whereas if we choose the convention [tex]B_1 = 1/2[/tex], then the Euler–MacLaurin formula is :

[tex] \sum\limits_{a<k\leq b} f(k)=\int_a^b f(x)\,dx + \sum\limits_{k=1}^m \frac{B_k}{k!} \left(f^{(k-1)}(b)-f^{(k-1)}(a)\right)+R(f,m). \ [/tex]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
i can't understand
[tex] <br /> S_n = \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{1}{\sqrt{i}}\approx 2\sqrt{n} +\frac{1}{2\sqrt{n}} - \frac{1}{24n\sqrt{n}} -<br /> \frac{35}{24} <br /> [/tex]

can you explain it please?
 
All I am doing is substituting [tex]f(n) = 1/\sqrt{n}[/tex] into the Euler-Maclaurin formula. This time from Mathworld (since the formula is expanded in full), the http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Euler-MaclaurinIntegrationFormulas.html" formula can be written as :

[tex] \sum_{k=1}^{n-1}f(k)=\int_0^n f(k) dk-1/2[f(n)-f(0)]+1/(12)[f^{'}(n)-f^{'}(0)]-1/(720)[f^{'''}(n)-f^{'''}(0)]+1/(30240)[f^{(5)}(n)-f^{(5)}(0)]-1/(1209600)[f^{(7)}(n)-f^{(7)}(0)]+... [/tex]

Note that i have written [tex]1/2[f(n)-f(0)][/tex] instead of [tex]1/2[f(n)+f(0)][/tex]. The former is consistent with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernoulli_number" .

Then I make the approximation :

[tex] \sum_{k=1}^{n-1}f(k)\approx \int_0^n f(k)dk-1/2[f(n)-f(0)]+1/(12)[f^{'}(n)-f^{'}(0)][/tex]

Then I substitute [tex]f(k) = 1/\sqrt{k}[/tex], and then add [tex]f(n)[/tex] to the result since the summation in the formula is up to [tex](n-1)[/tex] where as we want it up to [tex]n[/tex]

All you have to do is to subsitute [tex]f(k) = 1/\sqrt{k}[/tex] into the formula above, and verify my result.
 
Last edited by a moderator: