How to approximate $sumlimits_{k=n}^{infty}frac{(ln(k))^{2}}{k^{3}}$?
$begingroup$
I am a bit perplexed in trying to find values $a,b,c$ so that the approximation is as precise as possible:
$$sum_{k=n}^{infty}frac{(ln(k))^{2}}{k^{3}} approx frac{1}{n^{2}}[a(ln (n))^{2}+b ln(n) + c]$$
I can see from Wolfram that $ln(x)$ could be written in many different ways and that the sum starting from $1$ can be written with Riemann zeta function here. They are probably not something I am looking here. The decreasing exponent hints me that perhaps the term in the sum can be approximated with its derivations, the first derivate here and the second here but when I try to approximate something goes wrong, perhaps wrong premise. Let $z=frac{ln(k)^{2}}{k^{3}}$ then
$$sum_{k=n}^{infty} z approx z' z-z' z^3/2!$$
by the Taylor approximation for the odd function ($ln(x)$ is odd, $x^3$ is odd and the oddity is preserved after the operations, maybe wrong, so $z$ is odd like $sin(x)$), I get:
$$sum_{k=n}^{infty} z approx (frac{1}{x^3}(2ln(x) - 3(ln(x))^2)) -frac{1}{x^2}(6 ln(x)^2-7 ln(x)+1)$$
something wrong because the first term has $x^3$ instead of $x^2$. I am sorry if this hard to read but stuck here. So is it the correct way to approximate the sum? Is it really with Riemann zeta function or does Taylor work here, as I am trying to do above?
I labeled the question with parity
because I think it is central here. I feel I may be misunderstanding how the oddity works over different operations, hopefully shown in my vague explanations, and hence the error.
analysis sequences-and-series
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am a bit perplexed in trying to find values $a,b,c$ so that the approximation is as precise as possible:
$$sum_{k=n}^{infty}frac{(ln(k))^{2}}{k^{3}} approx frac{1}{n^{2}}[a(ln (n))^{2}+b ln(n) + c]$$
I can see from Wolfram that $ln(x)$ could be written in many different ways and that the sum starting from $1$ can be written with Riemann zeta function here. They are probably not something I am looking here. The decreasing exponent hints me that perhaps the term in the sum can be approximated with its derivations, the first derivate here and the second here but when I try to approximate something goes wrong, perhaps wrong premise. Let $z=frac{ln(k)^{2}}{k^{3}}$ then
$$sum_{k=n}^{infty} z approx z' z-z' z^3/2!$$
by the Taylor approximation for the odd function ($ln(x)$ is odd, $x^3$ is odd and the oddity is preserved after the operations, maybe wrong, so $z$ is odd like $sin(x)$), I get:
$$sum_{k=n}^{infty} z approx (frac{1}{x^3}(2ln(x) - 3(ln(x))^2)) -frac{1}{x^2}(6 ln(x)^2-7 ln(x)+1)$$
something wrong because the first term has $x^3$ instead of $x^2$. I am sorry if this hard to read but stuck here. So is it the correct way to approximate the sum? Is it really with Riemann zeta function or does Taylor work here, as I am trying to do above?
I labeled the question with parity
because I think it is central here. I feel I may be misunderstanding how the oddity works over different operations, hopefully shown in my vague explanations, and hence the error.
analysis sequences-and-series
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Sorry, I don't think parity tag is the right tag. I have removed it.
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:09
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am a bit perplexed in trying to find values $a,b,c$ so that the approximation is as precise as possible:
$$sum_{k=n}^{infty}frac{(ln(k))^{2}}{k^{3}} approx frac{1}{n^{2}}[a(ln (n))^{2}+b ln(n) + c]$$
I can see from Wolfram that $ln(x)$ could be written in many different ways and that the sum starting from $1$ can be written with Riemann zeta function here. They are probably not something I am looking here. The decreasing exponent hints me that perhaps the term in the sum can be approximated with its derivations, the first derivate here and the second here but when I try to approximate something goes wrong, perhaps wrong premise. Let $z=frac{ln(k)^{2}}{k^{3}}$ then
$$sum_{k=n}^{infty} z approx z' z-z' z^3/2!$$
by the Taylor approximation for the odd function ($ln(x)$ is odd, $x^3$ is odd and the oddity is preserved after the operations, maybe wrong, so $z$ is odd like $sin(x)$), I get:
$$sum_{k=n}^{infty} z approx (frac{1}{x^3}(2ln(x) - 3(ln(x))^2)) -frac{1}{x^2}(6 ln(x)^2-7 ln(x)+1)$$
something wrong because the first term has $x^3$ instead of $x^2$. I am sorry if this hard to read but stuck here. So is it the correct way to approximate the sum? Is it really with Riemann zeta function or does Taylor work here, as I am trying to do above?
I labeled the question with parity
because I think it is central here. I feel I may be misunderstanding how the oddity works over different operations, hopefully shown in my vague explanations, and hence the error.
analysis sequences-and-series
$endgroup$
I am a bit perplexed in trying to find values $a,b,c$ so that the approximation is as precise as possible:
$$sum_{k=n}^{infty}frac{(ln(k))^{2}}{k^{3}} approx frac{1}{n^{2}}[a(ln (n))^{2}+b ln(n) + c]$$
I can see from Wolfram that $ln(x)$ could be written in many different ways and that the sum starting from $1$ can be written with Riemann zeta function here. They are probably not something I am looking here. The decreasing exponent hints me that perhaps the term in the sum can be approximated with its derivations, the first derivate here and the second here but when I try to approximate something goes wrong, perhaps wrong premise. Let $z=frac{ln(k)^{2}}{k^{3}}$ then
$$sum_{k=n}^{infty} z approx z' z-z' z^3/2!$$
by the Taylor approximation for the odd function ($ln(x)$ is odd, $x^3$ is odd and the oddity is preserved after the operations, maybe wrong, so $z$ is odd like $sin(x)$), I get:
$$sum_{k=n}^{infty} z approx (frac{1}{x^3}(2ln(x) - 3(ln(x))^2)) -frac{1}{x^2}(6 ln(x)^2-7 ln(x)+1)$$
something wrong because the first term has $x^3$ instead of $x^2$. I am sorry if this hard to read but stuck here. So is it the correct way to approximate the sum? Is it really with Riemann zeta function or does Taylor work here, as I am trying to do above?
I labeled the question with parity
because I think it is central here. I feel I may be misunderstanding how the oddity works over different operations, hopefully shown in my vague explanations, and hence the error.
analysis sequences-and-series
analysis sequences-and-series
edited Dec 10 '18 at 18:44
Martin Sleziak
44.7k10118272
44.7k10118272
asked Jan 16 '11 at 16:00
hhhhhh
2,82753578
2,82753578
$begingroup$
Sorry, I don't think parity tag is the right tag. I have removed it.
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:09
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Sorry, I don't think parity tag is the right tag. I have removed it.
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:09
$begingroup$
Sorry, I don't think parity tag is the right tag. I have removed it.
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:09
$begingroup$
Sorry, I don't think parity tag is the right tag. I have removed it.
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:09
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
You can try using elementary estimates (upper and lower bounds) with integrals (see the end of the answer), or can use the more general and quite useful Euler Mclaurin Summation Formula, which gives us
$$sum_{k=1}^{n} frac{log^2 k}{k^3} = int_{1}^{n} frac{log^2 x}{x^3} text{d}x + frac{log ^2 n}{2n^3} + C + mathcal{O}(frac{1}{n^{3+e}})$$
where $displaystyle e > 0$.
Now $$int_{1}^{n} frac{log^2 x}{x^3} text{d}x = - frac{2log^2 n + 2 log n + 1}{4n^2} + 1/4$$
Thus
$$sum_{k=1}^{n} frac{log^2 k}{k^3} = K - frac{2log^2 n + 2 log n + 1}{4n^2} + frac{log^2 n}{2n^3} + mathcal{O}left(frac{1}{n^{3+e}}right)$$
Since the LHS converges we have that
$$sum_{k=1}^{n} frac{log^2 k}{k^3} = sum_{k=1}^{infty}frac{log^2 k}{k^3} - frac{2log^2 n + 2 log n + 1}{4n^2} + frac{log^2 n}{2n^3} + mathcal{O}left(frac{1}{n^{3+e}}right)$$
Thus
$$sum_{k=n+1}^{infty}frac{log^2 k}{k^3} = frac{2log^2 n + 2 log n + 1}{4n^2} - frac{log^2 n}{2n^3} + mathcal{O}left(frac{1}{n^{3+e}}right)$$
And so
$$sum_{k=n}^{infty}frac{log^2 k}{k^3} = frac{2log^2 n + 2 log n + 1}{4n^2} + frac{log^2 n}{2n^3} + mathcal{O}left(frac{1}{n^{3+e}}right)$$
Note that the summation formula allows us to figure out the exact terms which make up the $displaystyle mathcal{O}left(frac{1}{n^{3+e}}right)$ and so we can make the formula more accurate by including as many lower order terms we need.
A more elementary way:
If $displaystyle f(x) ge 0$ and is monotonically decreasing then we have that
$$int_{n}^{M+1} f(x) text{d}x le sum_{k=n}^{M} f(k) le f(n) + int_{n}^{M} f(x) text{d}x$$
which can be seen by bounding the area under the curve by rectangles of width $1$.
For $displaystyle f(n) = frac{log ^2 n}{n^3}$, we can take limit as $displaystyle M to infty$ to get the asymptotic formula you need.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
so $a=1/2$, $b=1/2$ and $c=1/4$ ;)
$endgroup$
– Nabyl Bod
Jan 16 '11 at 19:24
1
$begingroup$
+1. Almost always when I want to approximate a series I find Euler Mclaurin Summation Formula really really useful.
$endgroup$
– user17762
Jan 16 '11 at 19:24
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Invoke an Integral test for convergence
then two Integration by parts give you (up to a mistake in my calculus)
$a=1/2$, $b=1/2$, and $c=1/4$.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Just mentioning the integral test is not enough, even though it gives the right answer in this case. Take $sum_{k=n}^{infty} e^{-k}$ for instance. Your logic gives the constant as $1$...
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:27
$begingroup$
I agree with you. However it is enough to get the asymptotic expansion here.
$endgroup$
– Nabyl Bod
Jan 16 '11 at 19:30
$begingroup$
It just happens to give the right answer is not proof enough.
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:39
$begingroup$
@Moron. Euler-Mclaurin is definetely the right tool to use. Thanks for your comment.
$endgroup$
– Nabyl Bod
Jan 16 '11 at 19:40
$begingroup$
We can do it more simply too, see the end of my answer (A similar method is actually used in the proof of the integral convergence test, I believe).
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:47
add a comment |
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',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
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
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f17713%2fhow-to-approximate-sum-limits-k-n-infty-frac-lnk2k3%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
You can try using elementary estimates (upper and lower bounds) with integrals (see the end of the answer), or can use the more general and quite useful Euler Mclaurin Summation Formula, which gives us
$$sum_{k=1}^{n} frac{log^2 k}{k^3} = int_{1}^{n} frac{log^2 x}{x^3} text{d}x + frac{log ^2 n}{2n^3} + C + mathcal{O}(frac{1}{n^{3+e}})$$
where $displaystyle e > 0$.
Now $$int_{1}^{n} frac{log^2 x}{x^3} text{d}x = - frac{2log^2 n + 2 log n + 1}{4n^2} + 1/4$$
Thus
$$sum_{k=1}^{n} frac{log^2 k}{k^3} = K - frac{2log^2 n + 2 log n + 1}{4n^2} + frac{log^2 n}{2n^3} + mathcal{O}left(frac{1}{n^{3+e}}right)$$
Since the LHS converges we have that
$$sum_{k=1}^{n} frac{log^2 k}{k^3} = sum_{k=1}^{infty}frac{log^2 k}{k^3} - frac{2log^2 n + 2 log n + 1}{4n^2} + frac{log^2 n}{2n^3} + mathcal{O}left(frac{1}{n^{3+e}}right)$$
Thus
$$sum_{k=n+1}^{infty}frac{log^2 k}{k^3} = frac{2log^2 n + 2 log n + 1}{4n^2} - frac{log^2 n}{2n^3} + mathcal{O}left(frac{1}{n^{3+e}}right)$$
And so
$$sum_{k=n}^{infty}frac{log^2 k}{k^3} = frac{2log^2 n + 2 log n + 1}{4n^2} + frac{log^2 n}{2n^3} + mathcal{O}left(frac{1}{n^{3+e}}right)$$
Note that the summation formula allows us to figure out the exact terms which make up the $displaystyle mathcal{O}left(frac{1}{n^{3+e}}right)$ and so we can make the formula more accurate by including as many lower order terms we need.
A more elementary way:
If $displaystyle f(x) ge 0$ and is monotonically decreasing then we have that
$$int_{n}^{M+1} f(x) text{d}x le sum_{k=n}^{M} f(k) le f(n) + int_{n}^{M} f(x) text{d}x$$
which can be seen by bounding the area under the curve by rectangles of width $1$.
For $displaystyle f(n) = frac{log ^2 n}{n^3}$, we can take limit as $displaystyle M to infty$ to get the asymptotic formula you need.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
so $a=1/2$, $b=1/2$ and $c=1/4$ ;)
$endgroup$
– Nabyl Bod
Jan 16 '11 at 19:24
1
$begingroup$
+1. Almost always when I want to approximate a series I find Euler Mclaurin Summation Formula really really useful.
$endgroup$
– user17762
Jan 16 '11 at 19:24
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You can try using elementary estimates (upper and lower bounds) with integrals (see the end of the answer), or can use the more general and quite useful Euler Mclaurin Summation Formula, which gives us
$$sum_{k=1}^{n} frac{log^2 k}{k^3} = int_{1}^{n} frac{log^2 x}{x^3} text{d}x + frac{log ^2 n}{2n^3} + C + mathcal{O}(frac{1}{n^{3+e}})$$
where $displaystyle e > 0$.
Now $$int_{1}^{n} frac{log^2 x}{x^3} text{d}x = - frac{2log^2 n + 2 log n + 1}{4n^2} + 1/4$$
Thus
$$sum_{k=1}^{n} frac{log^2 k}{k^3} = K - frac{2log^2 n + 2 log n + 1}{4n^2} + frac{log^2 n}{2n^3} + mathcal{O}left(frac{1}{n^{3+e}}right)$$
Since the LHS converges we have that
$$sum_{k=1}^{n} frac{log^2 k}{k^3} = sum_{k=1}^{infty}frac{log^2 k}{k^3} - frac{2log^2 n + 2 log n + 1}{4n^2} + frac{log^2 n}{2n^3} + mathcal{O}left(frac{1}{n^{3+e}}right)$$
Thus
$$sum_{k=n+1}^{infty}frac{log^2 k}{k^3} = frac{2log^2 n + 2 log n + 1}{4n^2} - frac{log^2 n}{2n^3} + mathcal{O}left(frac{1}{n^{3+e}}right)$$
And so
$$sum_{k=n}^{infty}frac{log^2 k}{k^3} = frac{2log^2 n + 2 log n + 1}{4n^2} + frac{log^2 n}{2n^3} + mathcal{O}left(frac{1}{n^{3+e}}right)$$
Note that the summation formula allows us to figure out the exact terms which make up the $displaystyle mathcal{O}left(frac{1}{n^{3+e}}right)$ and so we can make the formula more accurate by including as many lower order terms we need.
A more elementary way:
If $displaystyle f(x) ge 0$ and is monotonically decreasing then we have that
$$int_{n}^{M+1} f(x) text{d}x le sum_{k=n}^{M} f(k) le f(n) + int_{n}^{M} f(x) text{d}x$$
which can be seen by bounding the area under the curve by rectangles of width $1$.
For $displaystyle f(n) = frac{log ^2 n}{n^3}$, we can take limit as $displaystyle M to infty$ to get the asymptotic formula you need.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
so $a=1/2$, $b=1/2$ and $c=1/4$ ;)
$endgroup$
– Nabyl Bod
Jan 16 '11 at 19:24
1
$begingroup$
+1. Almost always when I want to approximate a series I find Euler Mclaurin Summation Formula really really useful.
$endgroup$
– user17762
Jan 16 '11 at 19:24
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You can try using elementary estimates (upper and lower bounds) with integrals (see the end of the answer), or can use the more general and quite useful Euler Mclaurin Summation Formula, which gives us
$$sum_{k=1}^{n} frac{log^2 k}{k^3} = int_{1}^{n} frac{log^2 x}{x^3} text{d}x + frac{log ^2 n}{2n^3} + C + mathcal{O}(frac{1}{n^{3+e}})$$
where $displaystyle e > 0$.
Now $$int_{1}^{n} frac{log^2 x}{x^3} text{d}x = - frac{2log^2 n + 2 log n + 1}{4n^2} + 1/4$$
Thus
$$sum_{k=1}^{n} frac{log^2 k}{k^3} = K - frac{2log^2 n + 2 log n + 1}{4n^2} + frac{log^2 n}{2n^3} + mathcal{O}left(frac{1}{n^{3+e}}right)$$
Since the LHS converges we have that
$$sum_{k=1}^{n} frac{log^2 k}{k^3} = sum_{k=1}^{infty}frac{log^2 k}{k^3} - frac{2log^2 n + 2 log n + 1}{4n^2} + frac{log^2 n}{2n^3} + mathcal{O}left(frac{1}{n^{3+e}}right)$$
Thus
$$sum_{k=n+1}^{infty}frac{log^2 k}{k^3} = frac{2log^2 n + 2 log n + 1}{4n^2} - frac{log^2 n}{2n^3} + mathcal{O}left(frac{1}{n^{3+e}}right)$$
And so
$$sum_{k=n}^{infty}frac{log^2 k}{k^3} = frac{2log^2 n + 2 log n + 1}{4n^2} + frac{log^2 n}{2n^3} + mathcal{O}left(frac{1}{n^{3+e}}right)$$
Note that the summation formula allows us to figure out the exact terms which make up the $displaystyle mathcal{O}left(frac{1}{n^{3+e}}right)$ and so we can make the formula more accurate by including as many lower order terms we need.
A more elementary way:
If $displaystyle f(x) ge 0$ and is monotonically decreasing then we have that
$$int_{n}^{M+1} f(x) text{d}x le sum_{k=n}^{M} f(k) le f(n) + int_{n}^{M} f(x) text{d}x$$
which can be seen by bounding the area under the curve by rectangles of width $1$.
For $displaystyle f(n) = frac{log ^2 n}{n^3}$, we can take limit as $displaystyle M to infty$ to get the asymptotic formula you need.
$endgroup$
You can try using elementary estimates (upper and lower bounds) with integrals (see the end of the answer), or can use the more general and quite useful Euler Mclaurin Summation Formula, which gives us
$$sum_{k=1}^{n} frac{log^2 k}{k^3} = int_{1}^{n} frac{log^2 x}{x^3} text{d}x + frac{log ^2 n}{2n^3} + C + mathcal{O}(frac{1}{n^{3+e}})$$
where $displaystyle e > 0$.
Now $$int_{1}^{n} frac{log^2 x}{x^3} text{d}x = - frac{2log^2 n + 2 log n + 1}{4n^2} + 1/4$$
Thus
$$sum_{k=1}^{n} frac{log^2 k}{k^3} = K - frac{2log^2 n + 2 log n + 1}{4n^2} + frac{log^2 n}{2n^3} + mathcal{O}left(frac{1}{n^{3+e}}right)$$
Since the LHS converges we have that
$$sum_{k=1}^{n} frac{log^2 k}{k^3} = sum_{k=1}^{infty}frac{log^2 k}{k^3} - frac{2log^2 n + 2 log n + 1}{4n^2} + frac{log^2 n}{2n^3} + mathcal{O}left(frac{1}{n^{3+e}}right)$$
Thus
$$sum_{k=n+1}^{infty}frac{log^2 k}{k^3} = frac{2log^2 n + 2 log n + 1}{4n^2} - frac{log^2 n}{2n^3} + mathcal{O}left(frac{1}{n^{3+e}}right)$$
And so
$$sum_{k=n}^{infty}frac{log^2 k}{k^3} = frac{2log^2 n + 2 log n + 1}{4n^2} + frac{log^2 n}{2n^3} + mathcal{O}left(frac{1}{n^{3+e}}right)$$
Note that the summation formula allows us to figure out the exact terms which make up the $displaystyle mathcal{O}left(frac{1}{n^{3+e}}right)$ and so we can make the formula more accurate by including as many lower order terms we need.
A more elementary way:
If $displaystyle f(x) ge 0$ and is monotonically decreasing then we have that
$$int_{n}^{M+1} f(x) text{d}x le sum_{k=n}^{M} f(k) le f(n) + int_{n}^{M} f(x) text{d}x$$
which can be seen by bounding the area under the curve by rectangles of width $1$.
For $displaystyle f(n) = frac{log ^2 n}{n^3}$, we can take limit as $displaystyle M to infty$ to get the asymptotic formula you need.
edited Jan 16 '11 at 21:12
answered Jan 16 '11 at 19:06
AryabhataAryabhata
70k6156246
70k6156246
$begingroup$
so $a=1/2$, $b=1/2$ and $c=1/4$ ;)
$endgroup$
– Nabyl Bod
Jan 16 '11 at 19:24
1
$begingroup$
+1. Almost always when I want to approximate a series I find Euler Mclaurin Summation Formula really really useful.
$endgroup$
– user17762
Jan 16 '11 at 19:24
add a comment |
$begingroup$
so $a=1/2$, $b=1/2$ and $c=1/4$ ;)
$endgroup$
– Nabyl Bod
Jan 16 '11 at 19:24
1
$begingroup$
+1. Almost always when I want to approximate a series I find Euler Mclaurin Summation Formula really really useful.
$endgroup$
– user17762
Jan 16 '11 at 19:24
$begingroup$
so $a=1/2$, $b=1/2$ and $c=1/4$ ;)
$endgroup$
– Nabyl Bod
Jan 16 '11 at 19:24
$begingroup$
so $a=1/2$, $b=1/2$ and $c=1/4$ ;)
$endgroup$
– Nabyl Bod
Jan 16 '11 at 19:24
1
1
$begingroup$
+1. Almost always when I want to approximate a series I find Euler Mclaurin Summation Formula really really useful.
$endgroup$
– user17762
Jan 16 '11 at 19:24
$begingroup$
+1. Almost always when I want to approximate a series I find Euler Mclaurin Summation Formula really really useful.
$endgroup$
– user17762
Jan 16 '11 at 19:24
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Invoke an Integral test for convergence
then two Integration by parts give you (up to a mistake in my calculus)
$a=1/2$, $b=1/2$, and $c=1/4$.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Just mentioning the integral test is not enough, even though it gives the right answer in this case. Take $sum_{k=n}^{infty} e^{-k}$ for instance. Your logic gives the constant as $1$...
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:27
$begingroup$
I agree with you. However it is enough to get the asymptotic expansion here.
$endgroup$
– Nabyl Bod
Jan 16 '11 at 19:30
$begingroup$
It just happens to give the right answer is not proof enough.
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:39
$begingroup$
@Moron. Euler-Mclaurin is definetely the right tool to use. Thanks for your comment.
$endgroup$
– Nabyl Bod
Jan 16 '11 at 19:40
$begingroup$
We can do it more simply too, see the end of my answer (A similar method is actually used in the proof of the integral convergence test, I believe).
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:47
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Invoke an Integral test for convergence
then two Integration by parts give you (up to a mistake in my calculus)
$a=1/2$, $b=1/2$, and $c=1/4$.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Just mentioning the integral test is not enough, even though it gives the right answer in this case. Take $sum_{k=n}^{infty} e^{-k}$ for instance. Your logic gives the constant as $1$...
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:27
$begingroup$
I agree with you. However it is enough to get the asymptotic expansion here.
$endgroup$
– Nabyl Bod
Jan 16 '11 at 19:30
$begingroup$
It just happens to give the right answer is not proof enough.
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:39
$begingroup$
@Moron. Euler-Mclaurin is definetely the right tool to use. Thanks for your comment.
$endgroup$
– Nabyl Bod
Jan 16 '11 at 19:40
$begingroup$
We can do it more simply too, see the end of my answer (A similar method is actually used in the proof of the integral convergence test, I believe).
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:47
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Invoke an Integral test for convergence
then two Integration by parts give you (up to a mistake in my calculus)
$a=1/2$, $b=1/2$, and $c=1/4$.
$endgroup$
Invoke an Integral test for convergence
then two Integration by parts give you (up to a mistake in my calculus)
$a=1/2$, $b=1/2$, and $c=1/4$.
answered Jan 16 '11 at 17:09
Nabyl BodNabyl Bod
44624
44624
1
$begingroup$
Just mentioning the integral test is not enough, even though it gives the right answer in this case. Take $sum_{k=n}^{infty} e^{-k}$ for instance. Your logic gives the constant as $1$...
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:27
$begingroup$
I agree with you. However it is enough to get the asymptotic expansion here.
$endgroup$
– Nabyl Bod
Jan 16 '11 at 19:30
$begingroup$
It just happens to give the right answer is not proof enough.
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:39
$begingroup$
@Moron. Euler-Mclaurin is definetely the right tool to use. Thanks for your comment.
$endgroup$
– Nabyl Bod
Jan 16 '11 at 19:40
$begingroup$
We can do it more simply too, see the end of my answer (A similar method is actually used in the proof of the integral convergence test, I believe).
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:47
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
Just mentioning the integral test is not enough, even though it gives the right answer in this case. Take $sum_{k=n}^{infty} e^{-k}$ for instance. Your logic gives the constant as $1$...
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:27
$begingroup$
I agree with you. However it is enough to get the asymptotic expansion here.
$endgroup$
– Nabyl Bod
Jan 16 '11 at 19:30
$begingroup$
It just happens to give the right answer is not proof enough.
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:39
$begingroup$
@Moron. Euler-Mclaurin is definetely the right tool to use. Thanks for your comment.
$endgroup$
– Nabyl Bod
Jan 16 '11 at 19:40
$begingroup$
We can do it more simply too, see the end of my answer (A similar method is actually used in the proof of the integral convergence test, I believe).
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:47
1
1
$begingroup$
Just mentioning the integral test is not enough, even though it gives the right answer in this case. Take $sum_{k=n}^{infty} e^{-k}$ for instance. Your logic gives the constant as $1$...
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:27
$begingroup$
Just mentioning the integral test is not enough, even though it gives the right answer in this case. Take $sum_{k=n}^{infty} e^{-k}$ for instance. Your logic gives the constant as $1$...
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:27
$begingroup$
I agree with you. However it is enough to get the asymptotic expansion here.
$endgroup$
– Nabyl Bod
Jan 16 '11 at 19:30
$begingroup$
I agree with you. However it is enough to get the asymptotic expansion here.
$endgroup$
– Nabyl Bod
Jan 16 '11 at 19:30
$begingroup$
It just happens to give the right answer is not proof enough.
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:39
$begingroup$
It just happens to give the right answer is not proof enough.
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:39
$begingroup$
@Moron. Euler-Mclaurin is definetely the right tool to use. Thanks for your comment.
$endgroup$
– Nabyl Bod
Jan 16 '11 at 19:40
$begingroup$
@Moron. Euler-Mclaurin is definetely the right tool to use. Thanks for your comment.
$endgroup$
– Nabyl Bod
Jan 16 '11 at 19:40
$begingroup$
We can do it more simply too, see the end of my answer (A similar method is actually used in the proof of the integral convergence test, I believe).
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:47
$begingroup$
We can do it more simply too, see the end of my answer (A similar method is actually used in the proof of the integral convergence test, I believe).
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:47
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f17713%2fhow-to-approximate-sum-limits-k-n-infty-frac-lnk2k3%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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
$begingroup$
Sorry, I don't think parity tag is the right tag. I have removed it.
$endgroup$
– Aryabhata
Jan 16 '11 at 19:09