S = n = 0 ∑ ∞ k = 0 ∑ n 2 − n ( − 1 ) k ( k n ) ( k + 1 ) − 4
Write S = b a π c , where a , b and c are positive integers and a , b are coprime. Enter a + b + c as your answer.
This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try
refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and,
finally, (c)
loading the
non-javascript version of this page
. We're sorry about the hassle.
Another clear and careful solution! (+1) Thanks!
Log in to reply
Actually, I want to improve on my previous solution. Let X be the number of tosses of a fair coin required to obtain k + 1 Heads. Then P [ X = n + 1 ] = 2 − ( n + 1 ) ( k n ) n ≥ k , and hence, since these probabilities must add to 1 : n = k ∑ ∞ 2 − n ( k n ) = 2 . Then, reversing the order of summation (which is OK since the series are absolutely convergent) S = = = n = 0 ∑ ∞ k = 0 ∑ n 2 − n ( − 1 ) k ( k n ) ( k + 1 ) 4 1 = k = 0 ∑ ∞ ( − 1 ) k ( k + 1 ) 4 1 n = k ∑ ∞ 2 − n ( k n ) 2 k = 0 ∑ ∞ ( − 1 ) k ( k + 1 ) 4 1 2 ( 1 − 8 1 ) ζ ( 4 ) = 3 6 0 7 π 4
Log in to reply
Yes, this is an interesting variant (+1)
I wished Brilliant allows you to post your solution twice! Loved this alternative answer.
Grabs printer
In general, n = k ∑ ∞ x n ( k n ) = ( 1 − x ) k + 1 x k
i did the same thing. i got stuck. i am sorry. i have a question why there are so many questions in brilliant on infinite series.
Using Euler's (backward) Series Transformation , with a k = ( k + 1 ) 4 1 , we find that S = 2 ∑ n = 0 ∞ ( n + 1 ) 4 ( − 1 ) n = 2 η ( 4 ) = 2 ( 1 − 8 1 ) ζ ( 4 ) = 3 6 0 7 π 4 . The relationship between the Dirichlet Eta Function η ( s ) and the Zeta Function ζ ( s ) was discussed here .
Can you explain how you managed to convert a double sum ( Σ Σ ) into a single sum? Because I don't see it anywhere in the very first link you shared.
Log in to reply
If you combine equations (1), (4), and (5) in the link, the Euler-Knopp transformation takes the form k = 0 ∑ ∞ ( − 1 ) k a k = k = 0 ∑ ∞ m = 0 ∑ k 2 k + 1 1 ( − 1 ) m ( m k ) a m
This is all I'm using. (Euler initially introduced this kind of transformation to "accelerate convergence")
Log in to reply
Hmmm... I've gotten another form (different from yours). I'll come back to this some other time.
Or you can just apply equation (21) to get the answer.
I wonder how to prove that equation...
Log in to reply
@Pi Han Goh – Well, that's where my problem comes from. I was looking at this analytic continuation of ζ ( s ) , and, like you, I was wondering how to prove it. The best I could think of was the Euler transform.
Nice and unique approach. Another (similar) way is Summation by Parts (which can also be used to prove Euler's Series Transform).
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
We have n = 0 ∑ ∞ k = 0 ∑ n 2 − n ( − 1 ) k ( k n ) x k = n = 0 ∑ ∞ 2 − n ( 1 − x ) n = 1 + x 2 , and this series is absolutely convergent for − 1 < x ≤ 1 and uniformly convergent for 0 ≤ x ≤ 1 . Since ∫ 0 1 x α ( ln x ) 3 d x = ( α + 1 ) 4 − 6 , α > − 1 , we see that S = − 6 1 ∫ 0 1 1 + x 2 ( ln x ) 3 d x = − 3 1 n = 0 ∑ ∞ ( − 1 ) n ∫ 0 1 x n ( ln x ) 3 d x = 2 n = 0 ∑ ∞ ( − 1 ) n ( n + 1 ) 4 1 and so S = 2 ( n = 1 ∑ ∞ n 4 1 − 2 n = 1 ∑ ∞ ( 2 n ) 4 1 ) = 2 ( 1 − 8 1 ) ζ ( 4 ) = 3 6 0 7 π 4 , making the answer 7 + 3 6 0 + 4 = 3 7 1 .