I am just a bit curious about the Weierstrass Factorization theorem on the Gamma function.

The Weierstrass Factorization theorem says this:

Let $f(z)$ be an entire function. Suppose that $f$ vanishes to order $m, m \geq 0$. Let ${a_n}$ be the other zeros of $f$, listed with multiplicities. Then there is an entire function, $g(z)$ such that $$f(z) = z^m e^{g(z)} \prod_{n = 1}^{\infty} E_{n-1}\left(\frac{z}{a_n}\right).$$

From the reciprocal Gamma function, by the Weierstrass factorization theorem, they came up with this:

$$ \frac{1}{\Gamma(z)} = ze^{\gamma*z}\prod_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(1 + \frac{z}{n}\right)e^{-z/n}. $$

Now how did they compute the Weierstrass Elementary Factors? I know the definition of the factors. I have looked this function and it says it has simple zeros at $0$ and at all negative integers. I am just confused how they computed the elementary factors on this function. Thanks for all the help!

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It is known that all elementary factors can be taken to be $e^{z/r}$ if the function grows at most like $e^{|z|^\alpha}$ for $\alpha<2$. Stirling's approximation to $\Gamma(z)$ establishes such a bound for $\alpha=1+\varepsilon$. $\endgroup$ – Greg Martin May 13 at 6:14
  • $\begingroup$ Im not sure what you mean. $\endgroup$ – Jim Baker May 13 at 14:18
  • $\begingroup$ Seems like you need Hadamard’s factorization theorem. $\endgroup$ – Ovi May 13 at 14:53
  • $\begingroup$ Are you assuming $1/\Gamma(z)$ is entire ? Its zeros are known to be at negative integers. Estimating its growth isn't difficult thus obtaining the condition for applying Weierstrass factorization. $\endgroup$ – reuns May 15 at 4:42

The convexity of $\log(\Gamma(x))$ says that for $x\in[0,1]$, $$ \Gamma(n)\,(n-1+x)^x\le\Gamma(n+x)\le\Gamma(n)\,n^x $$ and the inequalities are reversed for $x\not\in[0,1]$. Note that this is exact for $x\in\{0,1\}$. In any case, $$ \begin{align} 1 &=\lim_{n\to\infty}\frac{(n-1)!\,n^x}{\Gamma(n+x)}\\[6pt] &=\lim_{n\to\infty}\frac{(n-1)!\,n^x}{\Gamma(x)\prod\limits_{k=0}^{n-1}(k+x)} \end{align} $$ Therefore, since $\sum\limits_{k=1}^{n-1}\frac1k\sim\gamma+\log(n)$, we get $n^x=e^{x\log(n)}\sim e^{-\gamma x}\prod\limits_{k=1}^{n-1}e^{x/k}$ $$ \begin{align} \Gamma(x) &=\lim_{n\to\infty}\frac{(n-1)!\,n^x}{\prod\limits_{k=0}^{n-1}(k+x)}\\ &=\lim_{n\to\infty}\frac{n^x}x\prod_{k=1}^{n-1}\frac{k}{k+x}\\[6pt] &=\lim_{n\to\infty}\frac{e^{-\gamma x}}x\prod_{k=1}^{n-1}\frac{e^{x/k}}{1+x/k}\\[6pt] &=\frac{e^{-\gamma x}}x\prod_{k=1}^\infty\frac{e^{x/k}}{1+x/k} \end{align} $$

  • $\begingroup$ @reuns: Other than log-convexity (which is mentioned), I am only using the usual $\Gamma(x+1)=x\Gamma(x)$ and $\Gamma(1)=1$. $\endgroup$ – robjohn May 15 at 5:08
  • $\begingroup$ So $\Gamma(x+1) = x \Gamma(x)$ plus $\log$-convexity on $x > 0$ implies the Weierstrass product for $x > 0$ and by analytic continuation it stays true for $\Gamma(z), z\in \Bbb{C}$. The $\log$-convexity follows from Cauchy-Schwartz. $\endgroup$ – reuns May 15 at 6:28
  • $\begingroup$ If we define $\Gamma(x)=\int_0^\infty t^{x-1}e^{-t}\,\mathrm{d}t$, then the log-convexity follows from Cauchy-Schwarz or Jensen's Inequality, as shown at the end of this answer. However, the Bohr-Mollerup Theorem guarantees that we get the same $\Gamma(x)$ assuming the standard recurrence and log-convexity. $\endgroup$ – robjohn May 15 at 6:49

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.