1
$\begingroup$

Here $\chi$ is a completely multiplicative function with $\chi(p)\in\{-1,+1\}$ for any prime $p$, but not necessarily a character. Also $s=\sigma + it$ as usual. The series corresponding to $L(s,\chi)$ is the expansion of the Euler product $$\prod_{p\in P} \frac{1}{1-\chi(p)p^{-s}} =\sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{a_k}{k^s}$$ where $P$ is an infinite subset of primes (or the full set), and $2\in P$. The product is ordered by increasing values of $p$. The $\eta(s,\chi)$ series is the alternating version: $$ \sum_{k=1}^\infty (-1)^{k+1}\frac{a_k}{k^s} $$ When $\sigma>1$ and everything converges nicely, we have: $\eta(s,\chi)=(1-2^{1-s})L(s,\chi)$. Note that $a_k\in\{-1,0,+1\}$.

The goal is to obtain a partial analytic continuation of one series (usually not to the full complex plane) when the other one (its alternating version) converges over a larger domain. The fundamental example is when $\chi(p)=1$. Then $L$ is the Riemann zeta function defined for $\sigma>1$ due to convergence limitations ($a_k=1$), while $\eta$ is the Dirichlet eta function defined (via the aternating series) for $\sigma > 0$.

The purpose is to work more easily with some $\chi$ that causes one of the two series to have a smaller domain of convergence than its alternating version. Or is it possible that both series have abscissa of convergence $\sigma=1$, depending on $\chi$?

$\endgroup$
13
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ You are mixing up both $z$ and $s$ as complex variables in a Dirichlet series. Stick to just one letter: $s$. It is not usual to write $z=\sigma + it$, but instead $s=\sigma+it$. $\endgroup$
    – KConrad
    Commented Jul 4, 2022 at 12:58
  • $\begingroup$ @KConrad: thanks, I made the change. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 4, 2022 at 14:39
  • $\begingroup$ Why should this true outside of the RZ case? If your coefficients already change signs infinitely many times why should introducing a fairly arbitrary $(-1)^n$ based on parity change anything? In the RZ case there is a clear reason why $\eta$ works better, while in the non principal real character cases already the Dirichlet series converges for $\Re s > 0$ because already the $a_k$ alternate well enough $\endgroup$
    – Conrad
    Commented Jul 4, 2022 at 15:24
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Please use a high-level tag like "nt.number-theory". I added this tag now. $\endgroup$
    – GH from MO
    Commented Jul 4, 2022 at 15:43
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Generally, this is impossible. Indeed, for Dirichlet $L$-series with poles (from the right) of order at least 2 at $s=1$, this actually impossible. The alternating Dirichlet series would still diverge at $s=1$. $\endgroup$
    – Jack L.
    Commented Jul 7, 2022 at 10:17

0

You must log in to answer this question.