Take the 2-minute tour ×
MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Considering the $\textit{Divisor Summatory Function}$, $D(n)$, defined as $$ D(n) = \sum_{k=1}^{n}d(k) , $$ where $$ d(n) = \sum_{k|n}^{n}1. $$

One can observe the following pattern in the values of $D(n)$,

$$ \lbrace{D(n)\rbrace}=\lbrace \overbrace{1,3,5,\;}^{3,odd}\overbrace{8,10,14,16,20,}^{5,even}\overbrace{23,27,29,35,37,41,45,}^{7,odd}\cdots \rbrace $$

where groups of odd elements alternate with groups of even elements and where the $n^{th}$ group has $2n-1$ elements, (we can see that the pattern pesists). Now, based on this (but it is not necessary that this pattern of $D(n)$ is verified for all $n$ we can only assume that such a similar pattern exists), and considering that any number can be written as $$ \begin{align*} n=p_{1}^{\alpha_{1}}\cdot p_{2}^{\alpha_{2}}\cdot p_{3}^{\alpha_{3}} \cdots p_{n}^{\alpha_{n}} \end{align*} $$ where $p_{i}$ are prime numbers, one can define the following arithmetical functions $$ a(n)= \begin{cases} 1, & \text{if all } D(\alpha_1), D(\alpha_2), \ldots, D(\alpha_n) \text{ are even} , \\\\ \\\\ 0, & \text{if one or more of the } D(\alpha_{i}) \text{ is odd}, \end{cases} $$ and $$b(n)\;=\; \begin{cases} (-1)^{n_1+n_2+\cdots+n_i}, &\text{if } \alpha_i = n_i^2, \\\\ \\\\ 0, & \text{if } \alpha_i \text{ is not of the form } n_i^2, \end{cases} $$ ($b(n)=$A197774) then we can define two Dirichlet series $A(s)=\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\frac{a(k)}{n^{s}}$ with $a(1)=1$ and $B(s)=\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\frac{b(k)}{n^{s}}$ with $b(1)=1$.

Both of the Dirichlet series have, respectively, the following Euler's products $$ A(s) = \prod_{p\in \mathbb{P}}\left(1+\frac{1}{p^{4s}}+\cdots+\frac{1}{p^{8s}}+\frac{1}{p^{16s}}+\cdots+\frac{1}{p^{24s}}+\cdots\right) $$ and $$ B(s) = \prod_{p\in \mathbb{P}}\left(1 - \frac{1}{p^{s}}+\frac{1}{p^{4s}}-\frac{1}{p^{9s}}+\frac{1}{p^{16s}}-\frac{1}{p^{25s}}+\frac{1}{p^{36s}}-\cdots\right) $$ First we can see that $A(s)$ is absolutely convergent for $s>\frac{1}{4}$. Secondly we can observe that $B(s)$ is related to $\vartheta_{4}(0,x)=1-x+x^{4}-x^{9}+x^{16}\cdots$ (the Jacobi Theta function) by $$ \begin{equation*} B(s) = \prod_{p\in \mathbb{P}}\left(\frac{1}{2} \vartheta_{4}(0,p^{-s})+1 \right) \end{equation*} $$ and thirdly $$ \begin{equation*} \zeta(s) = \frac{A(s)}{B(s)} \end{equation*} $$ We can think of $b(n)$ as a generalization of $\mu(n)$, the Möbius function and we can assume that if $B(s)$ converges for $\Re{s}>\frac{1}{2}$ then $\zeta(s)$ has no zeros on the right of $\frac{1}{2}$, just like the Mertens function, where $$ \begin{equation*} \frac{1}{\zeta(s)} = s\int_{1}^{\infty}\frac{M(x)}{x^{s+1}}dx \end{equation*} $$ similarly for $\zeta(s)$ we have $$ \begin{equation*} \zeta(s) = \frac{A(s)}{ s\int_{1}^{\infty}\frac{B(x)}{x^{s+1}}dx} \end{equation*} $$ where $M(x)$ is the Mertens function $$ \begin{equation*} M(x)=\sum_{1\leq n \leq x}\mu(x) \end{equation*} $$ and $B(x)$ is $$ \begin{equation*} B(x)=\sum_{1 \leq n \leq x}b(x) \end{equation*} $$ My question is: Were these Dirichlet series, $A(s)$ and $B(s)$, studied before and related to the $\zeta(s)$-function the way I did? Or... is this something new?

Thanks.

share|improve this question
7  
The pattern "3 odd, 5 even, 7 odd etc." is a simple consequence of the fact that $d(n)$ is odd if and only if $n$ is a square. –  GH from MO Nov 28 '11 at 16:55
2  
Posted a while ago on MSE math.stackexchange.com/questions/73354/… –  Eric Naslund Nov 28 '11 at 17:32
    
@Eric: Thanks, I linked my response below there. –  GH from MO Nov 28 '11 at 17:38
add comment

1 Answer

up vote 6 down vote accepted

If $B(s)$ is any Dirichlet series which factors as an Euler product $\prod_{p\in\mathbb{P}}B_p(s)$ satisfying $$ B_p(s)=1-\frac{1}{p^s}+O\left(\frac{1}{p^{2\sigma}}\right),\qquad s=\sigma+it, $$ then $B(s)=A(s)/\zeta(s)$, where $A(s)$ is given by an Euler product which is absolutely and locally uniformly convergent for $\Re(s)>1/2$. As a result, the poles of $B(s)$ are precisely the zeros of $\zeta(s)$ in $\Re(s)>1/2$, hence if the Dirichlet series $B(s)$ converges here, then the Riemann Hypothesis follows.

In fact it is not hard to relate directly the partial sums of the coefficients $b(n)$ of $B(s)$ to those of $\mu(n)$ and vice versa, since $b$ is a convolution $b=a\ast\mu$ where $a(n)$ is a sparse sequence, namely the coefficients of $A(s)$. In short, the exact shape of $b(n)$ is irrelevant as long as the above conditions on $B_p(s)$ are met, which in turn can be translated to: (1) the coefficients are multiplicative, (2) $b(p)=-1$ for $p$ prime, (3) $b(p^k)$ is not too large for $k>1$. Your example is one of many.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.