This question already has an answer here:

Let $\zeta(s)= \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{n^{s}}$ a standard formula.

I'm confused if you tell me: does this series: $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{1} {n^{s}}$ converge?

I will answer you: this series is divergent. But if you say: $\zeta(-2)$ it will be: $\zeta(-2)= \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{n^{-2}}=0$. Will be convergent. So why ?

marked as duplicate by Cameron Williams, user147263, Grigory M, Claude Leibovici, daw Jun 9 '15 at 6:25

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • Similar questions has been asked before, see for example this. Note that this link talks about $\zeta(-1)$, but for what is the essence of your questions this is the same thing. See also this – Winther Jun 7 '15 at 21:32
  • The fact that the analytic continuation has a finite value (namely, $0$) does not vouch for convergence of the series. A simpler example: $1+2+2^2+2^3+\ldots$ arguably blows up, yet this is the analytic continuation to $x=2$ of $1/(1-x)$, so the analytic continuation takes value $-1$. Hard to rationalize how the sum of positive reals could be negative. (Hilariously, in the $2$-adics, that conclusion is literally correct, but that is tangential to the present issue.) – paul garrett Jun 7 '15 at 21:37

When people say "zeta function has zeros on negative even integers", they are talking about the analytic continuation of the Riemann zeta function, and the naive formula only works for Re(s)>1

See this, which gives a functional equation for $\zeta{(s)}$: $$\zeta{(s)} = 2^s \pi^{s-1} \sin{\left(\frac{\pi s}{2}\right)} \Gamma{(1-s)} \zeta{(1-s)}$$ All negative even integers are "trivial zeros" of the zeta function, because $\sin{\left(\frac{\pi s}{2}\right)}$ would equal $0$.

  • ok, so why mathematicians didn't advice us to use the above formula in general , i understand somethings according to the received answers that :zeta(-2) has no general formula and diverge . – zeraoulia rafik Jun 7 '15 at 21:41
  • I'm guessing that, when you say "in general", you mean that $s$ is a positive integer. In that case, $\Gamma{(1-s)}$ is the $\Gamma$ of a negative integer, which is undefined. – Ant Jun 7 '15 at 21:45
  • @zera: Mathematicians do advise us to use analytic continuation when we talk about $\zeta(s)$ with $\mathrm{Re}\;s \le 1$. – GEdgar Jun 7 '15 at 22:37

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