19
$\begingroup$

Wolfram$\alpha$ says that we have the following identity $$ \left(\frac{\pi}{2}\right)^{2}=1+2\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\frac{(2k-1)\zeta(2k)}{2^{2k}} $$

but, how does one prove such identity?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Maybe $$\zeta(2k)=(-1)^{k+1}\frac{B_{2k}(2\pi)^{2k}}{2(2k)!}$$ might help? The Bernoulli numbers might be troublesome though. $\endgroup$ – Tim Ratigan Dec 18 '13 at 16:27
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ How about utilizing the Taylor series of the log-gamma function? $\endgroup$ – Sangchul Lee Dec 18 '13 at 16:35
8
$\begingroup$

It's well known that $$ \pi\cot(\pi x)=\frac 1x-2\sum_{n=1}^\infty\zeta(2n)x^{2n-1}; $$ taking derivatives we get $$ \frac{\pi^2}{\sin^2\pi x}=x^{-2}+2\sum_{n=1}^\infty(2n-1)\zeta(2n)x^{2n-2}; $$ in particular for $x=\frac12$ $$ \pi^2=4+2\sum_{n=1}^\infty(2n-1)\zeta(2n)\frac1{2^{2n-2}}; $$ this is your formula (multiplied by 4).

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

$\newcommand{\+}{^{\dagger}} \newcommand{\angles}[1]{\left\langle #1 \right\rangle} \newcommand{\braces}[1]{\left\lbrace #1 \right\rbrace} \newcommand{\bracks}[1]{\left\lbrack #1 \right\rbrack} \newcommand{\ceil}[1]{\,\left\lceil #1 \right\rceil\,} \newcommand{\dd}{{\rm d}} \newcommand{\down}{\downarrow} \newcommand{\ds}[1]{\displaystyle{#1}} \newcommand{\equalby}[1]{{#1 \atop {= \atop \vphantom{\huge A}}}} \newcommand{\expo}[1]{\,{\rm e}^{#1}\,} \newcommand{\fermi}{\,{\rm f}} \newcommand{\floor}[1]{\,\left\lfloor #1 \right\rfloor\,} \newcommand{\half}{{1 \over 2}} \newcommand{\ic}{{\rm i}} \newcommand{\iff}{\Longleftrightarrow} \newcommand{\imp}{\Longrightarrow} \newcommand{\isdiv}{\,\left.\right\vert\,} \newcommand{\ket}[1]{\left\vert #1\right\rangle} \newcommand{\ol}[1]{\overline{#1}} \newcommand{\pars}[1]{\left( #1 \right)} \newcommand{\partiald}[3][]{\frac{\partial^{#1} #2}{\partial #3^{#1}}} \newcommand{\pp}{{\cal P}} \newcommand{\root}[2][]{\,\sqrt[#1]{\,#2\,}\,} \newcommand{\sech}{\,{\rm sech}} \newcommand{\sgn}{\,{\rm sgn}} \newcommand{\totald}[3][]{\frac{{\rm d}^{#1} #2}{{\rm d} #3^{#1}}} \newcommand{\ul}[1]{\underline{#1}} \newcommand{\verts}[1]{\left\vert\, #1 \,\right\vert}$ $$\pars{\pi \over 2}^{2} = 1 + 2\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}{\pars{2k - 1}\zeta\pars{2k} \over 2^{2k}}:\ {\Large ?} \tag{1} $$

\begin{align} &\color{#00f}{\large\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}{\pars{2k - 1}\zeta\pars{2k} \over 2^{2k}}}= \sum_{k=1}^{\infty}{2k - 1 \over 2^{2k}}\sum_{\ell = 1}^{\infty}{1 \over \ell^{2k}} =\sum_{\ell = 1}^{\infty}\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\pars{2k - 1}\pars{1 \over 2\ell}^{2k} \\[3mm]&=\sum_{\ell = 1}^{\infty}\bracks{x^{2} \totald{}{x}\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}x^{2k - 1}}_{x = 1/\pars{2\ell}} =\sum_{\ell = 1}^{\infty}\braces{x^{2}\, \totald{}{x}\bracks{x \over 1 - x^{2}}}_{x = 1/\pars{2\ell}} \\[3mm]&=\sum_{\ell = 1}^{\infty}\bracks{x^{2}\, {1 + x^{2} \over \pars{1 - x^{2}}^{2}}}_{x = 1/\pars{2\ell}} =\sum_{\ell = 1}^{\infty}\bracks{ {1/x^{2} + 1 \over \pars{1/x^{2} - 1}^{2}}}_{x = 1/\pars{2\ell}} \\[3mm]&=\sum_{\ell = 1}^{\infty}\bracks{ {1 \over 1/x^{2} - 1} + {2 \over \pars{1/x^{2} - 1}^{2}}}_{x = 1/\pars{2\ell}} =\left.\pars{2\,\totald{}{\mu} + 1}\sum_{\ell = 1}^{\infty}{1 \over 4\ell^{2} - \mu} \right\vert_{\mu = 1} \\[3mm]&=\pars{2\,\totald{}{\mu} + 1}\bracks{% {2 - \root{\mu}\pi\cot\pars{\root{\mu}\pi/2}} \over 4\mu}_{\mu = 1} =\color{#00f}{\large\half\bracks{\pars{\pi \over 2}^{2} - 1}}\tag{2} \end{align}

Replace $\pars{2}$ in $\pars{1}$.

$\endgroup$
-5
$\begingroup$

Do not worry about the downvote. It is just an attack on my answers.

The series can have the following integral representation

$$ \sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\frac{(2k-1)\zeta(2k)}{2^{2k-1}} = \int_{0}^{1}\frac{(t^2+1)\ln t}{t^2-1} dt = \frac{\pi^2}{4}-1.$$

$\endgroup$
  • 9
    $\begingroup$ Interesting. But why first equality holds? $\endgroup$ – Grigory M Dec 18 '13 at 17:10
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @GrigoryM: The series admits this integral representation. $\endgroup$ – Mhenni Benghorbal Dec 18 '13 at 17:15
  • $\begingroup$ @Downvoter: What's the downvote for? $\endgroup$ – Mhenni Benghorbal Dec 26 '13 at 21:08
  • $\begingroup$ @Downvoter: What's the downvote for? You do not like this integral representation! Tell us why you down voted the answer. $\endgroup$ – Mhenni Benghorbal Dec 29 '13 at 1:01
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ None of downvotes are mine, but how exactly 'this series admits this integral representation — prove it yourself' is any better than 'this series is equal to $\pi^2/4-1$ — prove it yourself'? Maybe experts can see what you're alluding too, but this answer hasn't taught me anything, I'm afraid (and, AFAICS, other users haven't found this helpful either). $\endgroup$ – Grigory M Jan 25 '14 at 22:26

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.