12
$\begingroup$

Earlier today I thought I proved that the following series diverged:

$$\sum_{n=2}^\infty\frac{\phi(n)}{n^2}$$

as a result of a misapplication of the prime number theorem. I mistook $\phi(n)$ for $\pi(n)$ in the statement. Is this salvageable? I've been trying to find lower bounds for $\phi(n)$ that I may pass to, but the literature on this is a bit dense for me.

Thanks

|cite|improve this question
$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I think you want an upper bound, to show the terms are less than those of some convergent series. $\endgroup$ – Chappers Apr 20 '17 at 22:13
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, I edited the statement. The misapplication would show divergence. $\endgroup$ – Prototank Apr 20 '17 at 22:14
27
$\begingroup$

It diverges. In fact, just taking the terms corresponding to primes gives $$\sum_{p \text{ prime}} \frac{\phi(p)}{p^2} = \sum_{p \text{ prime}} \frac{p-1}{p^2} > \sum_{p \text{ prime}} \frac{1}{2p}$$ and the sum of the reciprocals of the primes is known to diverge (Wikipedia link).

|cite|improve this answer
$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I was going this way, but you got there first. (+1). $\endgroup$ – Chappers Apr 20 '17 at 22:16
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ So if the Prime Number Theorem is given, in the form of $\lim_{k\to\infty} \frac{p_k}{k\log(k)}=1$, then does your idea, combined with limit comparison test, show that the series diverges? (I love your answer by the way, it is short and sweet. I merely have an audience in mind and would like to use something familiar, or at least famous enough) $\endgroup$ – Prototank Apr 20 '17 at 22:57
  • $\begingroup$ Sure: given $\lim_{k \to \infty} \frac{p_k}{k \log k} = 1$, we know that $\lim_{k \to \infty} \frac{1/(2p_k)}{1/(2k \log k)} = 1$, so $\sum_{p \text{ prime}} \frac{1}{2p} = \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{1}{2p_n}$ diverges iff $\sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{1}{2k \log k}$ diverges (which is most straightforwardly done by integral test). $\endgroup$ – Misha Lavrov Apr 20 '17 at 23:00
  • 8
    $\begingroup$ The divergence of the sum of reciprocals of the primes goes back to Euler, and in particular precedes the Prime Number Theorem. One way is that $$ \sum_{n=1}^N \frac{1}{n} \le \prod_{p_k \le N} \frac{1}{1-1/p_k}$$ and an infinite product $\prod_k \frac{1}{1-a_k}$ with $0 < a_k < 1$ diverges iff $\sum_k a_k$ diverges. $\endgroup$ – Robert Israel Apr 20 '17 at 23:06
7
$\begingroup$

Wikipedia says:

$$\sum_{n=1}^\infty\frac{\phi(n)}{n^s} = {\zeta(s-1)\over\zeta(s)}$$

So for $s = 2$, we get $\zeta(1)/\zeta(2)$ which diverges.

|cite|improve this answer
$\endgroup$
7
$\begingroup$

We have $\varphi(n)\leq n$, hence the Dirichlet series $\sum_{n\geq 1}\frac{\varphi(n)}{n^s}$ is convergent for any $s>2$.
Since $\varphi$ is a multiplicative function, by Euler's product $$ \sum_{n\geq 1}\frac{\varphi(n)}{n^s} = \prod_{p}\left(1+\frac{\varphi(p)}{p^s}+\frac{\varphi(p^2)}{p^{2s}}+\ldots\right)=\prod_{p}\frac{1-p^{-s}}{1-p^{1-s}}=\frac{\zeta(s-1)}{\zeta(s)} $$ for any $s>2$, where the RHS behaves like $\frac{6}{\pi^2(s-2)}$ as $s\to 2^+$.
It follows that the original series is divergent: $$ \sum_{n=1}^{N}\frac{\varphi(n)}{n^2}\approx \frac{6}{\pi^2}\log N.$$

|cite|improve this answer
$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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