Sign up ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

can anyone check if this formula is plausible ??

$$ \frac{1}{\zeta (s)} = \sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\frac{ (-\pi)^{n}(s-1)s}{2n!(s+2n)(s+2n+1)} $$

according to the authors this formula would be valid only $ 0 < \Re(s) <1/2 $

the paper may be found at

The authors claim

"Our representation of $\zeta^{−1}(s)$ for $\Re(s) ∈ (0, 1/2)$ - which seems to an anonymous referee "much too simple" to be true is analogical to the following - rather simple - series representations of $\zeta(s)$

$$\zeta(s) = \frac{1}{1-2^{1-s}}\sum_{n=1}^\infty\frac{(-1)^{n-1}}{n^s} \text{ for } \Re(s) >0, s\neq 1$$

share|cite|improve this question
Related… –  Eugene Jul 3 '12 at 20:59

3 Answers 3

up vote 2 down vote accepted

I think you can evaluate that sum. Multiply by $(-\pi)^{(s+1)/2}$, differentiate (this will cancel the $s+2n+1$ in the denominator); multiply by $(-\pi)^{1/2}$, differentiate (this will cancel the $s+2n$ in the denominator); what's left is essentially $e^{-\pi}$ times some simple function of $s$.

share|cite|improve this answer
I think what Gerry means is to replace $-\pi$ by a variable $t$. If $F(t) = \displaystyle \sum_{n=0}^\infty \dfrac{t^n (s-1)s}{2n! (s+2n)(s+2n+1)}$, then $$\dfrac{\partial}{\partial t} t^{1/2} \dfrac{\partial}{\partial t} t^{(s+1)/2} F(t) = \dfrac{s(s-1)}{8} t^{s/2-1} e^t$$ However, reversing the differentiations by integration leaves you with a not-very-pleasant integral. –  Robert Israel Jul 4 '12 at 5:08
Maple, by the way, evaluates the sum as $$\dfrac{s-1}{2s+2} {}_2F_{1}(s/2,(s+1)/2;s/2+1,s/2+3/2; -\pi)$$ –  Robert Israel Jul 4 '12 at 5:15
Oops, that should be ${}_2F_2$, not ${}_2F_1$. –  Robert Israel Jul 4 '12 at 17:05

I might be missing something dumb, but I think this can't be right. The given sum converges uniformly on compact subsets of $Re(s)>0$. (Because the summand is $O(\pi^n/(n! n^2))$.) So it gives an analytic function on $Re(s)>0$. Meanwhile, $\zeta(s)^{-1}$ does not have an analytic extension to $Re(s)>0$, since there are zeroes on the critical line.

I can't make head or tail of the paper you link, so I don't know where this claim coms from.

share|cite|improve this answer

You could also try numerical evaluation at some particular $s$, say $s=1/3$. It's not at all close: $1/\zeta(1/3) \approx -1.027368851$, his sum $\approx -.2205319901$.

share|cite|improve this answer
I'm curious why didn't they do that before publishing that paper, but maybe I should ask them. –  Pedro Tamaroff Jul 4 '12 at 2:53
@PeterTamaroff Check my link in the comment to the other answer, that probably explains a lot... –  N. S. Jul 4 '12 at 13:35

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.