This post is part 2 of this post , where we started to derive the fourier series of the Loggamma function. Today we are going to evaluate the coefficient and then, put all the pieces together to find the final expression. Evaluation of Consider Integrating by parts now observe the following with regards to the limit: therefore (1) Recall now the integral representation of the Digamma function (2) Plugging (2) on the right hand side of (1) (3) Lets now concentrate in the inner integral in blue and break it down in two integrals, namely Lest begin with (4) Now This integral was already evaluated here , therefore (5) Plugging (4) and (5) back in (3), we get (6) We will consider each of these integrals separately To compute we perform an integration by parts (7) Where in the last line we used the resul...
Today We will compute the following integral following the same ideas of the previous post : Recall (see here ) (1) Integrating both sides of (1) from 0 to Computing Recall (see here ) Letting we obtain We are looking for the Imaginary part of the equation above: Computing the quantities: The Glaisher function We know that (see here ): If we integrate from 0 to x we obtain Integrating from 0 to x we obtain
The goal of today´s post is to prove the following Fourier expansion for the Hurwitz zeta Function Recall the Series definition of the Hurwitz Zeta function (1) valid for . Where Integral representation of the Hurwitz zeta function (2) To prove (2), we start from the Gamma function Contour integral representation of the Hurwitz zeta function We now derive a contour integral representation for the Hurwitz Zeta function. The contour is the classic Hankel contour which is a loop around the negative real axis. It starts at −∞, encircles the origin once in the positive direction without enclosing any of the points ±2πi,±4πi,⋯ and returns to −∞ acording to the picture below For the function defined by the contour integral (3) is entire. For we have: (4) Proof: Over the bottom edge of the contour Letting On the upper edge we have Letting To show the boundedness of we proceed as following Taking l...
Comments
Post a Comment