3
$\begingroup$

Is anything known about the value of $$\zeta(3/2)=\sum_{n\geq 1}\frac{1}{n^{3/2}}?$$ It is a classical result that $\displaystyle \zeta(2)= \frac{\pi^2}{6}$ and $\zeta(3)$ has been shown to be irrational by Roger Apéry in 1979.

Do we even know if $$\zeta(3/2)=\sum_{n\geq 1}\frac{1}{n^{3/2}}$$ is an irrational number or not? Is it true that $$\zeta(3/2)=\sum_{n\geq 1}\frac{1}{n^{3/2}}=\frac{a}{b}\sum_{n\geq 1}\frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{n^{3/2}\binom{2n}{n}}?$$ Not sure if Apéry's proof can be adapted here since I haven't read it.

$\endgroup$
2
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It's been studied, but not enough to be here. This list includes it, mentioning its roles in physics (one is quantified here) and linking to OEIS. I think your specific mathematical queries about it may make this question better suited to Math Overflow. $\endgroup$
    – J.G.
    Nov 26 '20 at 20:37
  • $\begingroup$ @J.G. Thanks for the links! I should have checked the Wiki, didn't think I could find it there! $\endgroup$ Nov 26 '20 at 20:41
0
$\begingroup$

By no means an answer but an extended comment. I should also preface I am an amateur mathematician with no formal education. Following Wikipedia's entry for the Riemann zeta function we have the following functional equation: $$ \zeta(s)=2^{s}\pi^{s-1}\sin\left(\pi s/2\right)\Gamma(1-s)\zeta(1-s)\label{a}\tag{1} $$ Suppose $s=3/2.$ Via direct substitutions I can rewrite LHS side of $\ref{a}$ explicitly as $$ 2^{3/2}\pi^{3/2-1}\sin\left(3\pi/4\right)\Gamma(1-3/2)\zeta(1-3/2);\label{b}\tag{2} $$ which after regrouping and gathering like terms is equal to $$ 2^{3/2+1/2}\pi^{3/2-1+1/2}\zeta(-1/2);\label{c}\tag{3} $$ which is reducible to $$ 4\pi\zeta(-1/2).\label{d}\tag{4} $$ And so $$ \zeta(3/2)=4\pi\zeta(-1/2), \label{e}\tag{5} $$ Observe:

Case 1: Note $4\pi$ is an irrational number. If $\zeta(-1/2)$ is rational then RHS side of $\ref{e}$ is an irrational number and so to by equality is $\zeta(3/2).$

Case 2: Again note $4\pi$ is an irrational number. If $\zeta(3/2)$ is a rational number then the RHS of $\ref{e}$ is a rational number. If $\zeta(-1/2)$ is an rational number then the RHS of $\ref{e}$ is irrational; which is a contradiction. Subsequently $\zeta(-1/2)$ is an irrational number.

From cases 1 and 2 it seems at least one of $\zeta(3/2)$ or $\zeta(-1/2)$ is an irrational number. In particular they cannot both be rational. More strongly it would seem of the infinite number of pairs $$ \{\zeta(j/2),\zeta(1-j/2)\}_{j\in\mathbb{N}} $$ at least one number from each of the infinite pairs is irrational.

$\endgroup$

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.