Remember when I said that the next article would be the psychology article or an inequality article? Well...

I took the following problem off of Brilliant and I decided to make it a little bit tougher. I have to admit, the idea of using the Riemann-Zeta function didn't come to mind when solving the problem, but I decided to post it nonetheless, because it's rather interesting. As a reminder, the Riemann-Zeta function is defined as ζ(s)=∑∞i=1i−s. The Riemann Hypothesis, an open problem in Mathematics, is about a property of this function, namely that all 0-s of this function lie on the line Re(x)=12.
Back to the problem at hand: what is the value of ∑n∊ℕ2w(n)n2 where w(n) is the number of prime divisors of n.
Solution:
First off, even though an approximation of w(n) sounds plausible, believe me, it's not. We shall write this sum in a more comprehensible manner. Let us observe that, for a certain number n, the number of ways of writing n as a product of two coprime numbers is equal to 2w(n), so ∑n∊ℕ2w(n)n2=∑(a,b)=11(ab)2. Now, we know that ∑a,b∊ℕ1(ab)2=(∑a∊ℕ1a2)∗(∑b∊ℕ1b2)=ζ(2)2. In order to find this sum for coprime numbers, let us consider a=cm,b=cn, with c a natural number and (m,n)=1. Thus, ∑a,b∊ℕ1(ab)2=∑m.n,c∊ℕ1c4m2n2= =(∑c∊ℕ1c4)(∑(m,n)=11(mn2))
Thus, the required sum is ζ(2)2ζ(4)=2.5, which concludes the proof. Of course, there is a generalization to this problem for nm rather than n2, which is solvable through the same method and yields the result ζ(n)2ζ(2n). This was the first time when I actually used the Riemann-Zeta function in a problem, and it gave me a satisfying feeling, even though, as I said, the proof isn't completely mine. Brilliant has a great stash of great problems like this, so you should check them out.
Apologies for the fact that I haven't posted in two weeks, but I am very stressed out due to this whole application process and, since this is my terminal year of high school, I must prepare for the exams at the end of the year. There's also the fact that I am still thinking about how to solve the inequality I wanted to write about, and the fact that writing anything non-mathematical in nature, such as the psychology article, is a bit tough and requires some background checks... so I suppose that you should expect something completely random in the next article.
Cris.
No comments:
Post a Comment