18
$\begingroup$

There are many integral representations for $\zeta(3)$

Some lesser known are for instance :

$$\int_0^1\frac{x(1-x)}{\sin\pi x}\text{d}x= 7\frac{\zeta(3)}{\pi^3} $$

$$\int_0^1 \frac{\operatorname{li}(x)^3 \space (x-1)}{x^3} \text{d}x = \frac{\zeta(3)}{4} $$

$$\int_0^\pi x(\pi - x) \csc(x) \space \text{d}x = 7 \space \zeta(3) $$

$$ \int_0^{\infty} \frac{\tanh^2(x)}{x^2} \text{d}x = \frac{ 14 \space \zeta(3)}{\pi^2} $$

$$\int_0^{\frac{\pi}{2}} x \log\tan x \;\text{d}x=\frac{7}{8}\zeta(3)$$

$\zeta(2) $ also has many integral representations as does $ \frac{1}{\zeta(2)} $ , although this probability is because $\frac{1}{\pi}$ and $\frac{1}{\pi^2} $ have many. Well I suspect that because I know no simple integral expression for $\frac{1}{\zeta(3)} $.

My question is: is there some interesting integral $^*$ whose result is simply $\frac{1}{\zeta(3)}$?

Note

$^*$ Interesting integral means that things like

$$\int\limits_0^{+\infty} e^{- \zeta(3) \space x}\ \text{d}x = \frac{1}{\zeta(3)} $$

are not a good answer to my question.

$\endgroup$
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ A (fluke?) example found using Mathematica is $$\frac{1}{\zeta (3)}=\frac{3}{2} \int_1^{\infty } \frac{\log ^2(x)}{(x+1) \left(-2 \text{Li}_3(-x)+2 \text{Li}_2(-x) \log (x)+\log (x+1) \log ^2(x)\right){}^2} \, dx$$ If you integrate (indefinitely), invert and then differentiate you will find the starting function from which this originates. I inverted and swapped bounds. This method does not work in general, but remarkably in this case does seem to work for $\zeta(3)$, $\zeta(5)$ and perhaps all the other odd zeta constants. $\endgroup$ – James Arathoon Nov 2 '18 at 2:52
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Btw a strange observation is that most of the integral representations for $\zeta(3)$ are of the form $ 7 \space \zeta(3) $ times “ something “. This $7$ is somewhat mysterious since those Integral representations are just randomly and Naturally occuring with simple short integrands. I call this the “ holy phenomenon “ :) $\endgroup$ – mick Nov 3 '18 at 1:10
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @mick Do you happen to know if the $7$ is because $7=2^3-1$? So similar representations of $\zeta(5)$ will represent $31\zeta(5)$? $\endgroup$ – Carl Schildkraut Nov 3 '18 at 1:25
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Carl that might make sense. Ofcourse there are Many ways to arrive at the 7 because there are multiple ways to do the integral. But yes cases of “ $ 31 \zeta(5) $ ” occur and i even think $ 7 \zeta(3) + 31 \zeta(5) $. Btw i wonder about Integral representations of $1/( \zeta(3) + \zeta(5) )$. I considered posting that instead of the OP actually. Anyways about that 7 , I think it relates to the integrals being special cases of representations of zeta-like functions instead of zeta functions. Think alternating zeta , polylog , hurwitz etc. $\endgroup$ – mick Nov 3 '18 at 1:56
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @mick, but James' comment exactly tells how he found the integral. Numerically it's correct, I checked. I don't really see your point about the polylog, because its argument inside the integral is a variable. I think it's pretty amazing that any kind of definite integral was found for this number $\endgroup$ – Yuriy S Nov 3 '18 at 2:56
3
$\begingroup$

You could find an integral representation similar to one for the regular zeta function by using the mobius function. $$\Gamma(s)\frac{\mu(n)}{n^s}=\int_0^\infty x^{s-1}\mu(n)e^{-nx}dx$$

Summing over both sides we get $$\frac{\Gamma(s)}{\zeta(s)}=\int_0^\infty x^{s-1}\rho(x)dx$$

where $\rho(x)=\sum_{n=1}^\infty \mu(n)e^{-nx}$. However, I don't think that $\rho(x)$ has an expression in closed form.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ For $\text{Re}(s) > 1$, a similar idea gives $1/\zeta(s) = s \int_1^\infty M(x)x^{-s-1} dx$, where $M(x)$ is the Mertens function. $\endgroup$ – Chip Hurst Nov 2 '18 at 1:20
  • $\begingroup$ It is very very unlikely that $\rho(x)=\sum_{n=1}^\infty \mu(n)e^{-nx}$ has a closed form. Both from reasons of analysis , differential galois theory and number theory. In fact if it did then solving the prime twins conjecture seems much easier. “ Parity problem “ comes to mind. Just a comment. $\endgroup$ – mick Nov 3 '18 at 2:08

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.