Liouville function











up vote
1
down vote

favorite
1












enter image description here



I am having some trouble trying to solve this question.



I have been learning some number theory and I have come across this question. To be honest I am kinda lost.



I have seen this being solved



Let $n in mathbb{Z}$ with $n > 0$. Let $F(n) = sum_{d mid n} lambda(d)$. Prove that $$F(n) = begin{cases}1, quad text{if }n text{ is a perfect square}\ 0, quad text{otherwise} end{cases} $$



but I have no idea how to solve the first one.



Any help would be appreciated.










share|cite|improve this question
























  • Have you managed to prove that $lambda$ is multiplicative yet?
    – Frpzzd
    Nov 14 at 23:24










  • No not yet. That is what I am trying to do right now but I cannot seen to figure out how.
    – Hidaw
    Nov 14 at 23:31

















up vote
1
down vote

favorite
1












enter image description here



I am having some trouble trying to solve this question.



I have been learning some number theory and I have come across this question. To be honest I am kinda lost.



I have seen this being solved



Let $n in mathbb{Z}$ with $n > 0$. Let $F(n) = sum_{d mid n} lambda(d)$. Prove that $$F(n) = begin{cases}1, quad text{if }n text{ is a perfect square}\ 0, quad text{otherwise} end{cases} $$



but I have no idea how to solve the first one.



Any help would be appreciated.










share|cite|improve this question
























  • Have you managed to prove that $lambda$ is multiplicative yet?
    – Frpzzd
    Nov 14 at 23:24










  • No not yet. That is what I am trying to do right now but I cannot seen to figure out how.
    – Hidaw
    Nov 14 at 23:31















up vote
1
down vote

favorite
1









up vote
1
down vote

favorite
1






1





enter image description here



I am having some trouble trying to solve this question.



I have been learning some number theory and I have come across this question. To be honest I am kinda lost.



I have seen this being solved



Let $n in mathbb{Z}$ with $n > 0$. Let $F(n) = sum_{d mid n} lambda(d)$. Prove that $$F(n) = begin{cases}1, quad text{if }n text{ is a perfect square}\ 0, quad text{otherwise} end{cases} $$



but I have no idea how to solve the first one.



Any help would be appreciated.










share|cite|improve this question















enter image description here



I am having some trouble trying to solve this question.



I have been learning some number theory and I have come across this question. To be honest I am kinda lost.



I have seen this being solved



Let $n in mathbb{Z}$ with $n > 0$. Let $F(n) = sum_{d mid n} lambda(d)$. Prove that $$F(n) = begin{cases}1, quad text{if }n text{ is a perfect square}\ 0, quad text{otherwise} end{cases} $$



but I have no idea how to solve the first one.



Any help would be appreciated.







number-theory






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Nov 14 at 23:42

























asked Nov 14 at 23:23









Hidaw

473621




473621












  • Have you managed to prove that $lambda$ is multiplicative yet?
    – Frpzzd
    Nov 14 at 23:24










  • No not yet. That is what I am trying to do right now but I cannot seen to figure out how.
    – Hidaw
    Nov 14 at 23:31




















  • Have you managed to prove that $lambda$ is multiplicative yet?
    – Frpzzd
    Nov 14 at 23:24










  • No not yet. That is what I am trying to do right now but I cannot seen to figure out how.
    – Hidaw
    Nov 14 at 23:31


















Have you managed to prove that $lambda$ is multiplicative yet?
– Frpzzd
Nov 14 at 23:24




Have you managed to prove that $lambda$ is multiplicative yet?
– Frpzzd
Nov 14 at 23:24












No not yet. That is what I am trying to do right now but I cannot seen to figure out how.
– Hidaw
Nov 14 at 23:31






No not yet. That is what I am trying to do right now but I cannot seen to figure out how.
– Hidaw
Nov 14 at 23:31












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
2
down vote



accepted










By the definition that you posted, $lambda(n)=(-1)^{omega(n)}$, where $omega(n)$ is the number of prime factors of $n$, counting multiplicity. Since $omega(mn)=omega(m)+omega(n)$ for all $m,ninmathbb N$, we have that
$$lambda(mn)=(-1)^{omega(mn)}=(-1)^{omega(m)+omega(n)}=(-1)^{omega(m)}(-1)^{omega(n)}=lambda(m)lambda(n)$$
which proves that $lambda$ is completely multiplicative. As for your summation problem, I will offer you the following hint (a list of suggested steps for solving it) and let you fill in the rest:




  • First prove that if $f(n)$ is a multiplicative function (not necessarily completely multiplicative), then $F(n)=sum_{d|n}f(d)$ is also multiplicative


  • Then notice that if $n=prod p_i^{m_i}$ is the prime factorization of $n$ and $f$ is a multiplicative function, then $f(n)=prod f(p_i^{m_i})$


  • Finally, evaluate $F(n)$ for $n=p^k$ where $p$ is some prime, and then express a general formula for $F(n)$ for any $n$ by decomposing $n$ into its prime factorization







share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Thank you so very much! That makes so much sense. I really appreciate it.
    – Hidaw
    Nov 14 at 23:41






  • 1




    @Hidaw Glad to help!
    – Frpzzd
    Nov 14 at 23:42











Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














 

draft saved


draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2998959%2fliouville-function%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
2
down vote



accepted










By the definition that you posted, $lambda(n)=(-1)^{omega(n)}$, where $omega(n)$ is the number of prime factors of $n$, counting multiplicity. Since $omega(mn)=omega(m)+omega(n)$ for all $m,ninmathbb N$, we have that
$$lambda(mn)=(-1)^{omega(mn)}=(-1)^{omega(m)+omega(n)}=(-1)^{omega(m)}(-1)^{omega(n)}=lambda(m)lambda(n)$$
which proves that $lambda$ is completely multiplicative. As for your summation problem, I will offer you the following hint (a list of suggested steps for solving it) and let you fill in the rest:




  • First prove that if $f(n)$ is a multiplicative function (not necessarily completely multiplicative), then $F(n)=sum_{d|n}f(d)$ is also multiplicative


  • Then notice that if $n=prod p_i^{m_i}$ is the prime factorization of $n$ and $f$ is a multiplicative function, then $f(n)=prod f(p_i^{m_i})$


  • Finally, evaluate $F(n)$ for $n=p^k$ where $p$ is some prime, and then express a general formula for $F(n)$ for any $n$ by decomposing $n$ into its prime factorization







share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Thank you so very much! That makes so much sense. I really appreciate it.
    – Hidaw
    Nov 14 at 23:41






  • 1




    @Hidaw Glad to help!
    – Frpzzd
    Nov 14 at 23:42















up vote
2
down vote



accepted










By the definition that you posted, $lambda(n)=(-1)^{omega(n)}$, where $omega(n)$ is the number of prime factors of $n$, counting multiplicity. Since $omega(mn)=omega(m)+omega(n)$ for all $m,ninmathbb N$, we have that
$$lambda(mn)=(-1)^{omega(mn)}=(-1)^{omega(m)+omega(n)}=(-1)^{omega(m)}(-1)^{omega(n)}=lambda(m)lambda(n)$$
which proves that $lambda$ is completely multiplicative. As for your summation problem, I will offer you the following hint (a list of suggested steps for solving it) and let you fill in the rest:




  • First prove that if $f(n)$ is a multiplicative function (not necessarily completely multiplicative), then $F(n)=sum_{d|n}f(d)$ is also multiplicative


  • Then notice that if $n=prod p_i^{m_i}$ is the prime factorization of $n$ and $f$ is a multiplicative function, then $f(n)=prod f(p_i^{m_i})$


  • Finally, evaluate $F(n)$ for $n=p^k$ where $p$ is some prime, and then express a general formula for $F(n)$ for any $n$ by decomposing $n$ into its prime factorization







share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Thank you so very much! That makes so much sense. I really appreciate it.
    – Hidaw
    Nov 14 at 23:41






  • 1




    @Hidaw Glad to help!
    – Frpzzd
    Nov 14 at 23:42













up vote
2
down vote



accepted







up vote
2
down vote



accepted






By the definition that you posted, $lambda(n)=(-1)^{omega(n)}$, where $omega(n)$ is the number of prime factors of $n$, counting multiplicity. Since $omega(mn)=omega(m)+omega(n)$ for all $m,ninmathbb N$, we have that
$$lambda(mn)=(-1)^{omega(mn)}=(-1)^{omega(m)+omega(n)}=(-1)^{omega(m)}(-1)^{omega(n)}=lambda(m)lambda(n)$$
which proves that $lambda$ is completely multiplicative. As for your summation problem, I will offer you the following hint (a list of suggested steps for solving it) and let you fill in the rest:




  • First prove that if $f(n)$ is a multiplicative function (not necessarily completely multiplicative), then $F(n)=sum_{d|n}f(d)$ is also multiplicative


  • Then notice that if $n=prod p_i^{m_i}$ is the prime factorization of $n$ and $f$ is a multiplicative function, then $f(n)=prod f(p_i^{m_i})$


  • Finally, evaluate $F(n)$ for $n=p^k$ where $p$ is some prime, and then express a general formula for $F(n)$ for any $n$ by decomposing $n$ into its prime factorization







share|cite|improve this answer












By the definition that you posted, $lambda(n)=(-1)^{omega(n)}$, where $omega(n)$ is the number of prime factors of $n$, counting multiplicity. Since $omega(mn)=omega(m)+omega(n)$ for all $m,ninmathbb N$, we have that
$$lambda(mn)=(-1)^{omega(mn)}=(-1)^{omega(m)+omega(n)}=(-1)^{omega(m)}(-1)^{omega(n)}=lambda(m)lambda(n)$$
which proves that $lambda$ is completely multiplicative. As for your summation problem, I will offer you the following hint (a list of suggested steps for solving it) and let you fill in the rest:




  • First prove that if $f(n)$ is a multiplicative function (not necessarily completely multiplicative), then $F(n)=sum_{d|n}f(d)$ is also multiplicative


  • Then notice that if $n=prod p_i^{m_i}$ is the prime factorization of $n$ and $f$ is a multiplicative function, then $f(n)=prod f(p_i^{m_i})$


  • Finally, evaluate $F(n)$ for $n=p^k$ where $p$ is some prime, and then express a general formula for $F(n)$ for any $n$ by decomposing $n$ into its prime factorization








share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Nov 14 at 23:39









Frpzzd

19.8k638101




19.8k638101












  • Thank you so very much! That makes so much sense. I really appreciate it.
    – Hidaw
    Nov 14 at 23:41






  • 1




    @Hidaw Glad to help!
    – Frpzzd
    Nov 14 at 23:42


















  • Thank you so very much! That makes so much sense. I really appreciate it.
    – Hidaw
    Nov 14 at 23:41






  • 1




    @Hidaw Glad to help!
    – Frpzzd
    Nov 14 at 23:42
















Thank you so very much! That makes so much sense. I really appreciate it.
– Hidaw
Nov 14 at 23:41




Thank you so very much! That makes so much sense. I really appreciate it.
– Hidaw
Nov 14 at 23:41




1




1




@Hidaw Glad to help!
– Frpzzd
Nov 14 at 23:42




@Hidaw Glad to help!
– Frpzzd
Nov 14 at 23:42


















 

draft saved


draft discarded



















































 


draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2998959%2fliouville-function%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Plaza Victoria

In PowerPoint, is there a keyboard shortcut for bulleted / numbered list?

How to put 3 figures in Latex with 2 figures side by side and 1 below these side by side images but in...