# Prime Zeta without Möbius Function and Prime Summation

The prime zeta function can be expressed inversely in terms of the Riemann zeta function:

$$P(s)=\sum_{k=1}^\infty\frac{\mu(k)}{k} \ln[\zeta(ks)]$$

The equation is defined here. The Mathworld page also defines other ways it can be expressed in terms of the Riemann Zeta function, but they are expressed where $\ln[\zeta(s)] = \mathrm{etc}$, not $P(s)=\mathrm{etc}$.

Can this be rewritten to not use the Möbius ($\mu$) Function and without prime summation ($\sum_{p}$)?

I am using this in a C++ program. I am using the Boost libraries, so I can use the zeta function (but Boost does not have the prime zeta function). It also does not have the Mobius function. This is why I cannot really use the Mobius function like in the equation above.

As well, to use prime summation (or similarly product of primes), I have to generate a large vector of primes (not optimal). This is why I cannot really use prime summation (or product of primes, I suppose).

• Your question means nothing. By the way, do you know how to prove this formula ? – reuns Nov 4 '16 at 23:47
• @user1952009 I am not out to prove it. I will update the question to provide a link to the Mathworld page where it is defined. – esote Nov 4 '16 at 23:48
• You wouldn't have any hope to make it simpler, if you knew how to prove it – reuns Nov 4 '16 at 23:50
• Which operations do you allow? – Charles Nov 4 '16 at 23:52
• @user1952009 Thus why I ask it here, I have no idea how to redefine it without the Mobius function or prime summation, I was hoping someone here could be helpful. – esote Nov 4 '16 at 23:55

If you would prefer to write your own version using Boost, then you could re-implement my code (you'll probably want the primezeta_real function) using Boost instead of the PARI library. You would also need to write the Lambert W function, but that is not difficult and doesn't need to be done with high precision (it's used to determine how long you need to iterate a loop).
• And $\sum_{k < x} \frac{\mu(k)}{k}\ln \zeta(sk)$ is a good approximation to $P(s)$, since $\ln \zeta(sk) = \mathcal{O}(2^{-k})$ (and in the code it seems it is computing $\mu(k)$ each $k$ separately, which is not a good idea) – reuns Nov 5 '16 at 0:36