Welcome to MathOverflow

Question

2

For any sequence of complex numbers $(a_n)$, an application of the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality gives $$\left|\sum_{m=1}^{n}a_m\right|\leq \sqrt {n\sum_{m=1}^{n}|a_m|^2}.$$ Putting $a_n=\mu(n)/\sqrt n$, one (trivially) finds that $$\sum_{m=1}^{n}\frac{\mu(m)}{\sqrt m}= O(\sqrt{n\log n}).$$ Is a better unconditional estimate known to hold for this sequence? In other words, is Cauchy -Schwarz the most we know about this sequence?

flag	asked Oct 25 2011 at 19:40 Kevin Smith 553●2●8

6

For starters, the sum is bounded by $\sum_{m=1}^n 1/\sqrt{m} = O(\sqrt{n})$, which is of strictly lower order than $O(\sqrt{n\log n})$, though still trivial. One can probably do a bit better using zero-free regions for the Riemann zeta function. – Noam D. Elkies Oct 25 2011 at 19:46

Thanks, Noam. Ok, I can see that $O(\sqrt{n})$ can be proved by Euler-Maclaurin, or by writing $\sum_{m=1}^{n}1/\sqrt{m}$ as an inverse Mellin transform. Can the same be proved using Cauchy-Schwarz? – Kevin Smith Oct 25 2011 at 20:57

Pietro Majer · Accepted Answer · 2011-10-25 21:12:45Z UTC

5

Summing by parts and using the bound on the Mertens function $M(n)=o(n)$ (which is equivalent to the Prime Number Theorem) one gets for your sum $S(n)=o(\sqrt n)$. Better bounds on the order of magnitude of $M(n)$ of course give a better one for $S(n)$ (see e.g. the Handbook of Number Theory, by J. Sándor, Dragoslav S. Mitrinović, B. Crstici). And, since $O(n^{1/2+\epsilon})$ for all $\epsilon >0$ is equivalent to the Riemann hypothesis, I guess one can't expect for your sum better than $O(n^{\epsilon})$ for all $\epsilon >0$.

answered Oct 25 2011 at 21:12

Pietro Majer
19.8k●1●25●70

Great! Thanks, Pietro. I had thought the Prime Number Theorem would come into it. I guess that $o(\sqrt{n})$ is the best that is currently known then? I asked this question because I wondered if, when viewed as the distance from the origin, one can distinguish the growth of the sequence from a typical point in $\mathbb{R}^n$ - it appears then that one can hardly do so. – Kevin Smith Oct 25 2011 at 21:47

5

The specific versions of $o(\sqrt n)$ that are known are more precise than the statement $o(\sqrt n)$ itself. For example, the error term in the classical prime number theorem is $O\big(n\exp(-c\sqrt{\log n})\big)$ for some constant $c>0$; the corresponding estimate for your $M(n)$ would be $O\big(\sqrt n\cdot\exp(-c\sqrt{\log n})\big)$ (possibly with a slightly smaller $c$). – Greg Martin Oct 25 2011 at 23:33

Is Cauchy-Schwarz still the best we have on Mobius?

Remember to vote up questions/answers you find interesting or helpful (requires 15 reputation points)

1 Answer

You can accept an answer to one of your own questions by clicking the check mark next to it. This awards 15 reputation points to the person who answered and 2 reputation points to you.