Skip to main content
5 of 15
added 49 characters in body
GH from MO
  • 105.2k
  • 8
  • 292
  • 398

My first response was wrong, so let me correct it. I claim now that indeed $$ \sum_{k=0}^\infty\mu^k(1-\mu^kt)^n\asymp_\mu\frac{1}{nt}. $$ For the lower bound observe that the largest term occurs for $\mu^k\asymp_\mu \frac{1}{nt}$ and it contributes $\asymp_\mu\frac{1}{nt}$ to the sum. For the upper bound observe that the function $x\mapsto \mu^x (1-\mu^x t)^n$ increases when $\mu^x>\frac{1}{(n+1)t}$, decreases when $\mu^x<\frac{1}{(n+1)t}$, and has a maximum $\asymp\frac{1}{nt}$ when $\mu^x=\frac{1}{(n+1)t}$. Therefore, by the familiar technique of comparing an infinite sum to an integral, we obtain $$ \sum_{k=0}^\infty\mu^k(1-\mu^kt)^n \ll \frac{1}{nt}+\int_0^\infty \mu^x (1-\mu^x t)^n\ dx \ \ll_\mu \frac{1}{nt}.$$ Note that the integral can be evaluated explicitly by the change of variable $s:=\mu^x$, say.

Based on this argument, I doubt that $\lim_{n\to\infty}n f_n(t)$ exists. This is because for the integral above the limit does exist, but the difference between the sum and the integral is very sensitive to the nearest value of $\mu^k$ to $\frac{1}{nt}$. In other words, the fine behavior of $n f_n(t)$ depends on the fractional part of $\log_\mu(nt)$.

EDIT: I fixed the maximum in $x$.

GH from MO
  • 105.2k
  • 8
  • 292
  • 398