0
$\begingroup$

Riemann's prime counting function is given as

$$J(n)=\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\frac{\mu(k)}{k}\operatorname{li}(n^{1/k})$$

the approximations

\begin{align} \operatorname{li}(n)\sim J(n)\tag{1}\\ \operatorname{li}(n)-\sqrt{n}/\log n\sim J(n)\tag{2}\\ (1-\sqrt{n}/\log n)\operatorname{li}(n+\sqrt{n}\log n)\sim J(n)\tag{3}\\ \end{align}

get increasingly closer. Could these be the first few terms of an asymptotic expansion of $J(n),$ or can $(3)$ not be taken any further?

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ Small typo in the definition of prime counting function: $li(n^{1/k})$. $\endgroup$ – pisoir Sep 3 '17 at 15:15
  • $\begingroup$ In what sense is the question not answered in your MathWorld link? They write it as the "Gram Series". $\endgroup$ – Igor Rivin Sep 3 '17 at 18:03
  • $\begingroup$ @IgorRivin I don't think the Gram series is the same as the form as given above - if it is, I can't see it - am I missing something? $\endgroup$ – martin Sep 3 '17 at 18:41
  • $\begingroup$ It is not the same, but it IS an asymptotic expansion. $\endgroup$ – Igor Rivin Sep 3 '17 at 18:50
1
$\begingroup$

To make it clear $\sum_{k \ge 1} \frac{\mu(k)}{k} li(x^{1/k})$ is not a prime counting function.

The prime counting functions are $$\psi(x) = \sum_{p^k \le x} \log p, \quad J(x) = \sum_{p^k \le x} \frac{1}{k} = \int_{2-\epsilon}^x \frac{\psi'(y)}{\log y} dy = \sum_{k \ge 1} \frac{\pi(x^{1/k})}{k}, \quad \pi(x) = \sum_{p \le x} 1$$ Whose Mellin transforms are $\frac{-1}{s}\frac{\zeta'(s)}{\zeta(s)},\frac{1}{s}\log \zeta(s),\frac{1}{s}P(s) $.

The (Riemann) explicit formulas are $$\psi(x) = x - \sum_\rho \frac{x^\rho}{\rho} - \sum_{m\ge 1} \frac{x^{-2m}}{-2m}-\log 2 \pi, \\J(x) = \text{Li}(x)- \sum_\rho \text{Li}(x^\rho) - \sum_{m\ge 1} \text{Li}(x^{-2m})-A, \\\pi(x) = R(x) - \sum_\rho R(x^\rho) - \sum_{m\ge 1} R(x^{-2m})-B,\\ \text{Li}(x) = \int_2^x \frac{dy}{\log y}, \qquad R(x ) = \sum_{k \ge 1} \frac{\mu(k)}{k} \text{Li}(x^{1/k})$$

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ @martin what is your question then ? Do you see why $\text{Li}(x)$ is easier than $\text{li}(x) = \int_0^x \text{pv.}(\frac{1}{\log y}) dy$ ? $\endgroup$ – reuns Sep 5 '17 at 21:13
  • $\begingroup$ I am from Europe, so maybe that's where the confusion lies! $\endgroup$ – martin Sep 5 '17 at 21:29
  • $\begingroup$ @martin The confusion of what ? See apostol's book about analytic number theory. $\endgroup$ – reuns Sep 5 '17 at 21:33
  • $\begingroup$ sorry - I meant my confusion when referencing $\endgroup$ – martin Sep 5 '17 at 21:39

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.