Timeline for Reference to a variant of Abel's summation formula
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Nov 20, 2023 at 13:43 | vote | accept | Salvo Tringali | ||
Nov 20, 2023 at 13:37 | history | edited | Alexey Ustinov |
edited tags
|
|
Nov 20, 2023 at 13:09 | answer | added | Alexey Ustinov | timeline score: 1 | |
Dec 9, 2015 at 13:10 | answer | added | Salvo Tringali | timeline score: 2 | |
Dec 9, 2015 at 11:25 | history | edited | Salvo Tringali | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Fixed a typo and added a reference
|
Dec 9, 2015 at 11:10 | history | edited | Salvo Tringali | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Further generalized the formula
|
Dec 9, 2015 at 8:53 | comment | added | Salvo Tringali | That's one point: I don't consider what we are writing as first or mainly addressed to analytic number theorists. | |
Dec 9, 2015 at 2:35 | comment | added | Peter Humphries | To be honest, why do you need to cite a reference? This is a basic enough result that any analytic number theorist would take at face value. (Of course, if you're writing a paper that veers far enough outside of analytic number theory to the point where the target audience might not have ever seen partial summation, then I can see why you might feel a reference is required.) | |
Dec 9, 2015 at 1:44 | history | edited | Salvo Tringali | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 19 characters in body
|
Dec 9, 2015 at 1:38 | history | asked | Salvo Tringali | CC BY-SA 3.0 |