Saturday, January 2, 2016

real analysis - Alternative approaches to showing that gamma=inti0nftyleft(frac11+xafrac1exright),frac1x,dx, a>0




Starting from the limit definition of the Euler-Mascheroni constant γ as given by




γ=limn(log(n)+nk=11k)




we can show that γ has an integral representation





γ=0(1ex11xex)dx








Proof of (2): This is provided for completeness only and one can skip this part without losing context.




To show that the integral in (2) is equivalent to (1), we can proceed as follows.




0(1ex11xex)dx=0ex1ex(11exx)dx=k=10(ekxe(kxe(k+1)xx)dx=k=1(1klog(k+1k))=limnnk=1(1klog(k+1k))=limn(log(n+1)nk=11k)=limn(log(n)nk=11k)







Another integral representation for γ is given by




γ=0(1x(1+xa)1xex)dx




for a>0.




Equipped with (2), we can show the equivalence of (3) with (1) by showing that




0(1x(1+xa)1ex1)dx=0







To prove (4), I proceeded as follows.




limϵ0ϵ(1x(1+xa)1ex1)dx=limϵ0(1alog(1+xa)+log(1ex))|ϵ=limϵ0(1alog(1+ϵa)+log(1eϵ))=0



And we are done!







This approach seemed a bit cumbersome and indirect.




QUESTION: So, what are alternative approaches to establishing equivalence of (3) and (1)?



Answer



Integrating by parts,
0(11+xaex)dxx=00+0(axax(1+xa)2ex)logxdx




Of course, we recognise the second term as a familiar definition of/easy-to-derive formula for γ. The first term we need to show is zero. But
axalogxx(1+xa)2dx=xalogx1+xa1alog(1+xa),


which is continuous and tends to zero at both endpoints since a>0.






The really interesting thing about this result in my opinion is that it shows the first term is a complete red herring: let F be continuous and continuously differentiable on (0,) with the following properties:




  • F(x)=1+o(1/logx) as x0,


  • F(x)=o(xϵ) as x for some ϵ>0,

  • 0F(x)logxdx=0



Then
γ=0(F(x)ex)dxx.


The proof is essentially identical to the above:
0(F(x)ex)dxx=[(F(x)ex)logx]00(F(x)+ex)logxdx=0exlogxdx,

The integral on the left exists by the first two conditions on F, which are also enough to ensure the boundary terms from the integration by parts go to zero.


No comments:

Post a Comment

analysis - Injection, making bijection

I have injection f:AB and I want to get bijection. Can I just resting codomain to f(A)? I know that every function i...