6
$\begingroup$

In my old high school notebook (20 years ago), the following inequality appears with its proof:

$$1+\cos x + \frac{1}{2}\cos 2x + \cdots + \frac{1}{n}\cos nx \geq 0$$ for any real $x$ and positive integer $n$.

I am not the one that created this inequality. So the my question is where references for this inequality can be found.

$\endgroup$
1
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ You should be able to find a closed form for the derivative. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 1, 2021 at 17:41

2 Answers 2

9
$\begingroup$

According to the last sentence on page 16 of this paper, this inequality was proved by

W. H. Young, On certain series of Fourier, Proc. London Math. Soc. (2) 11 (1912), 357–366.

$\endgroup$
8
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ Which you can buy here: londmathsoc.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1112/plms/… for the reasonable price of $42.00. $\endgroup$
    – efs
    Commented Jul 1, 2021 at 18:09
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ When you say reasonable, you're being sarcastic, right? $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 1, 2021 at 18:53
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If this is William Henry Young then the UK copyright may have expired in July 2012. $\endgroup$
    – Henry
    Commented Jul 1, 2021 at 23:27
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Thank you very much, I can read Young's paper in Jstor. They provide each reader 100 free articles each month. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 1, 2021 at 23:55
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @DavidHandelman Of course... $\endgroup$
    – efs
    Commented Jul 2, 2021 at 1:54
1
$\begingroup$

A long comment: the derivative is not positive for all $x$, $n$. Thus there is the need for some more sophisticated argument than monotonicity.

The derivative is $$ - \Im \left( e^{ix}\cdot \frac{e^{inx} -1}{e^{ix}-1} \right).$$ The derivative being positive corresponds to $$\textrm{arg}\left( e^{ix}\cdot \frac{e^{inx} -1}{e^{ix}-1} \right) \le 0 .$$ Using additivity of arg, this reformulates as $$ \textrm{arg}(e^{ix}) -\textrm{arg}(e^{ix} -1 ) + \textrm{arg}(e^{inx} -1) \pmod{2 \pi} \in [0, \pi] .$$ Note that $y\equiv nx \pmod{2 \pi} $ can be almost anything if $x$ is irrational, thus in particular we would have $$ \textrm{arg}(e^{ix}) -\textrm{arg}(e^{ix} -1 ) + \textrm{arg}(e^{iy} -1) \pmod{2 \pi} \in [0, \pi] .$$ The $y$-term ranges over $[3\pi/4, 5\pi/4]$, thus we should have $$\textrm{arg}(e^{ix}) -\textrm{arg}(e^{ix} -1 ) \in [5/4\pi, 7/4\pi].$$

If $x$ is very small and positive, the expression is close to $3/4 \pi$, thus it is false.

$\endgroup$
2
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Good "long comment", but it becomes much more readable if one displays long equations, rather then writing everything inline. I've made some changes, but feel free to make additional changes to improve readability if you want. Also, of less importance, but rather than using \textrm{arg}, you'll get better spacing if you use \operatorname{arg}. I have not made that change. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 19, 2022 at 23:01
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks Joe! I was by phone and I meant to write 'just a comment', then it became too long and I didn't take time to readjust the format. Much nicer now! $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 21, 2022 at 10:28

You must log in to answer this question.

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