1
$\begingroup$

Considering a function $f$ exponentially decreasing at infinity, is the following function $\mathbb{Q}$ periodic ?

$$F(x)= \sum\limits_{q =1}^{\infty} \; \sum\limits_{n =1}^{\infty} \; \sum\limits_{\underset{(p,q)=1} {p=1}}^{q-1} f(n) \; e^{2 i \pi n (x+ \frac{p}{q}) }$$

First of all, the existence of the sum does not seem obvious. Then the fact that adding a rational to $x$ (it will change the order of summation) does not change the sum is absolutely not obvious (See example in my previous post: On construction of a $\mathbb{Q}$ periodic function with Fourier series, as above, a potential $\mathbb{Q}$ periodic function was proposed, unfortunately it did not work)

$\endgroup$
2
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This sum will diverge for the vast majority of choices of $f$. $\endgroup$ Commented May 13, 2016 at 17:12
  • $\begingroup$ May I ask why? For example for $f(n)= e^{-n}$ ? $\endgroup$
    – Bertrand
    Commented May 13, 2016 at 18:34

1 Answer 1

5
$\begingroup$

Your sum diverges for most $x\in\mathbb{R}$. The innermost sum is $$\sum\limits_{\underset{(p,q)=1} {p=1}}^{q-1} f(n) \; e^{2 i \pi n (x+ \frac{p}{q}) } = f(n)e^{2 i \pi nx}\sum\limits_{\underset{(p,q)=1} {p=1}}^{q-1}e^{2 i \pi n\frac{p}{q} } = f(n)e^{2 i \pi nx}\sum_{d\mid (n,q)}d\mu\left(\frac{q}{d}\right),$$ by the well-known formula for Ramanujan's sum. If $q$ is prime, then this simplifies to $$ f(n)e^{2 i \pi nx} \left(-1+q\cdot 1_{q\mid n}\right),$$ where $1_{q\mid n}$ is $1$ or $0$ depending on $q\mid n$ or $q\nmid n$. At any rate, for $q$ prime, the $n$-sum equals (upon writing $n=qm$ when $q\mid n$) $$ -\sum_{n=1}^\infty f(n)e^{2 i \pi nx} + q\sum_{m=1}^\infty f(qm)e^{2 i \pi qmx}.$$ If your original sum converges, then this expression tends to zero as $q\to\infty$. However, the second sum itself tends to zero as $q\to\infty$ by the exponential decay of $f$, so the first sum (which is independent of $q$) is zero: $$ \sum_{n=1}^\infty f(n)e^{2 i \pi nx} = 0. $$ So this is a necessary condition for the convergence of your sum. Unless $f$ is identically zero, this condition fails for a typical $x\in\mathbb{R}$.

BTW if an infinite sum of continuous functions converges uniformly, then the sum is also continuous. In addition, any continuous $\mathbb{Q}$-periodic function is constant.

Added. Two comments. First, Ramanujan's formula for the quoted special case is very simple, it simply says that the sum of $q$-th roots of unity equals zero. Second, as Robert Israel remarked, the necessary condition on $x$ only holds for finitely many values modulo $1$.

$\endgroup$
4
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ If $f$ is exponentially decreasing, $\widehat{f}(z) = \sum_{n=1}^\infty f(n) e^{2i\pi n z}$ is analytic in a neighbourhood of the real line, and in particular (unless $f$ is identically $0$) its zeros form a discrete set. $\endgroup$ Commented May 13, 2016 at 20:25
  • $\begingroup$ @RobertIsrael: You are absolutely right, thank you! $\endgroup$
    – GH from MO
    Commented May 13, 2016 at 20:26
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ In fact, even a measurable ${\mathbb Q}$-periodic function will be constant almost everywhere (this follows for instance from the Lebesgue differentiation theorem). So, short of using a construction based on the axiom of choice, it is not possible to come up with an explicit non-trivial ${\mathbb Q}$-periodic function. $\endgroup$
    – Terry Tao
    Commented May 13, 2016 at 22:04
  • $\begingroup$ @TerryTao: Thank you for this comment! $\endgroup$
    – GH from MO
    Commented May 13, 2016 at 22:22

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .