Compute $sum_{ngeq1}frac{1}{pi^2+n^2}$ by expanding $e^{pi x}$ in its Fourier series The 2019...
ELI5: Why do they say that Israel would have been the fourth country to land a spacecraft on the Moon and why do they call it low cost?
Segmentation fault output is suppressed when piping stdin into a function. Why?
Mortgage adviser recommends a longer term than necessary combined with overpayments
Derivation tree not rendering
Single author papers against my advisor's will?
Who or what is the being for whom Being is a question for Heidegger?
Can the DM override racial traits?
Cooking pasta in a water boiler
He got a vote 80% that of Emmanuel Macron’s
In horse breeding, what is the female equivalent of putting a horse out "to stud"?
Does Parliament need to approve the new Brexit delay to 31 October 2019?
What is special about square numbers here?
Relations between two reciprocal partial derivatives?
Simulating Exploding Dice
What do you call a plan that's an alternative plan in case your initial plan fails?
Sort a list of pairs representing an acyclic, partial automorphism
Why can't wing-mounted spoilers be used to steepen approaches?
Semisimplicity of the category of coherent sheaves?
Did God make two great lights or did He make the great light two?
Wall plug outlet change
When did F become S in typeography, and why?
Simulation of a banking system with an Account class in C++
What was the last x86 CPU that did not have the x87 floating-point unit built in?
How to test the equality of two Pearson correlation coefficients computed from the same sample?
Compute $sum_{ngeq1}frac{1}{pi^2+n^2}$ by expanding $e^{pi x}$ in its Fourier series
The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Deriving fourier series using complex numbers - introductionExponential Form of Fourier SeriesFourier Series of $f(x) = x$Am I using sums appropriately in simplifying this Fourier series?Complex Fourier series and its represntationFourier series - explaining step in proofCompute $sum_{n=1}^infty frac{1}{n^2+1}$ using Fourier series.Determining the Fourier Series and its convergencederivative of the Fourier seriescomplex fourier series expansion
$begingroup$
Compute $$sum_{ngeq1}frac{1}{pi^2+n^2}.$$
by expanding $e^{pi x}$ in its Fourier series.
So I calculated that
$$c_n=frac{1}{2pi}int_{-pi}^{pi}e^{pi x} e^{-inx} dx=frac{sinh{(pi^2)}(-1)^n}{pi(pi-in)},$$
which is correct. Now,
$$f(x)=e^{pi x}=sum_{nin{mathbb{Z}}}frac{sinh{(pi^2)}(-1)^n}{pi(pi-in)}e^{inx}.$$
At $x=0$ we have
$$1=sum_{nin{mathbb{Z}}}frac{sinh{(pi^2)}(-1)^n}{pi(pi-in)}=frac{sinh(pi^2)}{pi}sum_{ninmathbb{Z}}frac{(-1)^n}{pi-in}.$$
Taking out the case $n=0$ and splitting the sum by $n rightarrow -n$ in one of them we get
begin{align}
1&=frac{sinh(pi^2)}{pi}left(frac{1}{pi}+sum_{ngeq1}frac{(-1)^n}{pi-in} + sum_{ngeq1}frac{(-1)^{-n}}{pi+in}right)\
&=frac{sinh(pi^2)}{pi}left(frac{1}{pi}+2pisum_{ngeq1}frac{(-1)^n}{pi^2+n^2}right).
end{align}
So I almost have the desired sum here, only thing bothering me is the $(-1)^n$. How do I proceed?
Note that I'm not interested in alternate solutions. I already know at least 2 other methods.
summation power-series fourier-series
edited Mar 22 at 23:45
Andrews
1,2962423
asked Mar 22 at 20:35
ParsevalParseval
3,0741719
$endgroup$
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Compute $$sum_{ngeq1}frac{1}{pi^2+n^2}.$$
by expanding $e^{pi x}$ in its Fourier series.
So I calculated that
$$c_n=frac{1}{2pi}int_{-pi}^{pi}e^{pi x} e^{-inx} dx=frac{sinh{(pi^2)}(-1)^n}{pi(pi-in)},$$
which is correct. Now,
$$f(x)=e^{pi x}=sum_{nin{mathbb{Z}}}frac{sinh{(pi^2)}(-1)^n}{pi(pi-in)}e^{inx}.$$
At $x=0$ we have
$$1=sum_{nin{mathbb{Z}}}frac{sinh{(pi^2)}(-1)^n}{pi(pi-in)}=frac{sinh(pi^2)}{pi}sum_{ninmathbb{Z}}frac{(-1)^n}{pi-in}.$$
Taking out the case $n=0$ and splitting the sum by $n rightarrow -n$ in one of them we get
begin{align}
1&=frac{sinh(pi^2)}{pi}left(frac{1}{pi}+sum_{ngeq1}frac{(-1)^n}{pi-in} + sum_{ngeq1}frac{(-1)^{-n}}{pi+in}right)\
&=frac{sinh(pi^2)}{pi}left(frac{1}{pi}+2pisum_{ngeq1}frac{(-1)^n}{pi^2+n^2}right).
end{align}
So I almost have the desired sum here, only thing bothering me is the $(-1)^n$. How do I proceed?
Note that I'm not interested in alternate solutions. I already know at least 2 other methods.
summation power-series fourier-series
edited Mar 22 at 23:45
Andrews
1,2962423
asked Mar 22 at 20:35
ParsevalParseval
3,0741719
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
There is a typo. The computed coefficient should be $$c_n=frac{sinh(pi^2)}pifrac{(-1)^color{red}{n}}{pi-in}$$ It is of minor matter since you used the right coefficient later on but I was pretty confused in the first place by this typo.
$endgroup$
– mrtaurho
Mar 22 at 21:07
$begingroup$
Fixed it just before you wrote that comment :P My apologies!
$endgroup$
– Parseval
Mar 22 at 21:07
$begingroup$
It is still there ;) Within your computation of $c_n$ aswell as your definition of $f(x)$
$endgroup$
– mrtaurho
Mar 22 at 21:08
3
$begingroup$
Yes, It was on two places! Only bad thing with copy paste is that it also applies to errors and typos.
$endgroup$
– Parseval
Mar 22 at 21:09
2
$begingroup$
Try evaluating at $x=pi$ instead? That should cancel away the minuses.
$endgroup$
– Semiclassical
Mar 22 at 21:20
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Compute $$sum_{ngeq1}frac{1}{pi^2+n^2}.$$
by expanding $e^{pi x}$ in its Fourier series.
So I calculated that
$$c_n=frac{1}{2pi}int_{-pi}^{pi}e^{pi x} e^{-inx} dx=frac{sinh{(pi^2)}(-1)^n}{pi(pi-in)},$$
which is correct. Now,
$$f(x)=e^{pi x}=sum_{nin{mathbb{Z}}}frac{sinh{(pi^2)}(-1)^n}{pi(pi-in)}e^{inx}.$$
At $x=0$ we have
$$1=sum_{nin{mathbb{Z}}}frac{sinh{(pi^2)}(-1)^n}{pi(pi-in)}=frac{sinh(pi^2)}{pi}sum_{ninmathbb{Z}}frac{(-1)^n}{pi-in}.$$
Taking out the case $n=0$ and splitting the sum by $n rightarrow -n$ in one of them we get
begin{align}
1&=frac{sinh(pi^2)}{pi}left(frac{1}{pi}+sum_{ngeq1}frac{(-1)^n}{pi-in} + sum_{ngeq1}frac{(-1)^{-n}}{pi+in}right)\
&=frac{sinh(pi^2)}{pi}left(frac{1}{pi}+2pisum_{ngeq1}frac{(-1)^n}{pi^2+n^2}right).
end{align}
So I almost have the desired sum here, only thing bothering me is the $(-1)^n$. How do I proceed?
Note that I'm not interested in alternate solutions. I already know at least 2 other methods.
summation power-series fourier-series
edited Mar 22 at 23:45
Andrews
1,2962423
asked Mar 22 at 20:35
ParsevalParseval
3,0741719
$endgroup$
Compute $$sum_{ngeq1}frac{1}{pi^2+n^2}.$$
by expanding $e^{pi x}$ in its Fourier series.
So I calculated that
$$c_n=frac{1}{2pi}int_{-pi}^{pi}e^{pi x} e^{-inx} dx=frac{sinh{(pi^2)}(-1)^n}{pi(pi-in)},$$
which is correct. Now,
$$f(x)=e^{pi x}=sum_{nin{mathbb{Z}}}frac{sinh{(pi^2)}(-1)^n}{pi(pi-in)}e^{inx}.$$
At $x=0$ we have
$$1=sum_{nin{mathbb{Z}}}frac{sinh{(pi^2)}(-1)^n}{pi(pi-in)}=frac{sinh(pi^2)}{pi}sum_{ninmathbb{Z}}frac{(-1)^n}{pi-in}.$$
Taking out the case $n=0$ and splitting the sum by $n rightarrow -n$ in one of them we get
begin{align}
1&=frac{sinh(pi^2)}{pi}left(frac{1}{pi}+sum_{ngeq1}frac{(-1)^n}{pi-in} + sum_{ngeq1}frac{(-1)^{-n}}{pi+in}right)\
&=frac{sinh(pi^2)}{pi}left(frac{1}{pi}+2pisum_{ngeq1}frac{(-1)^n}{pi^2+n^2}right).
end{align}
So I almost have the desired sum here, only thing bothering me is the $(-1)^n$. How do I proceed?
Note that I'm not interested in alternate solutions. I already know at least 2 other methods.
summation power-series fourier-series
summation power-series fourier-series
edited Mar 22 at 23:45
Andrews
1,2962423
asked Mar 22 at 20:35
ParsevalParseval
3,0741719
edited Mar 22 at 23:45
Andrews
1,2962423
asked Mar 22 at 20:35
ParsevalParseval
3,0741719
edited Mar 22 at 23:45
Andrews
1,2962423
edited Mar 22 at 23:45
Andrews
1,2962423
edited Mar 22 at 23:45
Andrews
1,2962423
1,2962423
asked Mar 22 at 20:35
ParsevalParseval
3,0741719
asked Mar 22 at 20:35
ParsevalParseval
3,0741719
asked Mar 22 at 20:35
ParsevalParseval
3,0741719
3,0741719
$begingroup$
There is a typo. The computed coefficient should be $$c_n=frac{sinh(pi^2)}pifrac{(-1)^color{red}{n}}{pi-in}$$ It is of minor matter since you used the right coefficient later on but I was pretty confused in the first place by this typo.
$endgroup$
– mrtaurho
Mar 22 at 21:07
$begingroup$
Fixed it just before you wrote that comment :P My apologies!
$endgroup$
– Parseval
Mar 22 at 21:07
$begingroup$
It is still there ;) Within your computation of $c_n$ aswell as your definition of $f(x)$
$endgroup$
– mrtaurho
Mar 22 at 21:08
3
$begingroup$
Yes, It was on two places! Only bad thing with copy paste is that it also applies to errors and typos.
$endgroup$
– Parseval
Mar 22 at 21:09
2
$begingroup$
Try evaluating at $x=pi$ instead? That should cancel away the minuses.
$endgroup$
– Semiclassical
Mar 22 at 21:20
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
There is a typo. The computed coefficient should be $$c_n=frac{sinh(pi^2)}pifrac{(-1)^color{red}{n}}{pi-in}$$ It is of minor matter since you used the right coefficient later on but I was pretty confused in the first place by this typo.
$endgroup$
– mrtaurho
Mar 22 at 21:07
$begingroup$
Fixed it just before you wrote that comment :P My apologies!
$endgroup$
– Parseval
Mar 22 at 21:07
$begingroup$
It is still there ;) Within your computation of $c_n$ aswell as your definition of $f(x)$
$endgroup$
– mrtaurho
Mar 22 at 21:08
3
$begingroup$
Yes, It was on two places! Only bad thing with copy paste is that it also applies to errors and typos.
$endgroup$
– Parseval
Mar 22 at 21:09
2
$begingroup$
Try evaluating at $x=pi$ instead? That should cancel away the minuses.
$endgroup$
– Semiclassical
Mar 22 at 21:20
$begingroup$
There is a typo. The computed coefficient should be $$c_n=frac{sinh(pi^2)}pifrac{(-1)^color{red}{n}}{pi-in}$$ It is of minor matter since you used the right coefficient later on but I was pretty confused in the first place by this typo.
$endgroup$
– mrtaurho
Mar 22 at 21:07
$begingroup$
There is a typo. The computed coefficient should be $$c_n=frac{sinh(pi^2)}pifrac{(-1)^color{red}{n}}{pi-in}$$ It is of minor matter since you used the right coefficient later on but I was pretty confused in the first place by this typo.
$endgroup$
– mrtaurho
Mar 22 at 21:07
$begingroup$
Fixed it just before you wrote that comment :P My apologies!
$endgroup$
– Parseval
Mar 22 at 21:07
$begingroup$
Fixed it just before you wrote that comment :P My apologies!
$endgroup$
– Parseval
Mar 22 at 21:07
$begingroup$
It is still there ;) Within your computation of $c_n$ aswell as your definition of $f(x)$
$endgroup$
– mrtaurho
Mar 22 at 21:08
$begingroup$
It is still there ;) Within your computation of $c_n$ aswell as your definition of $f(x)$
$endgroup$
– mrtaurho
Mar 22 at 21:08
3
3
$begingroup$
Yes, It was on two places! Only bad thing with copy paste is that it also applies to errors and typos.
$endgroup$
– Parseval
Mar 22 at 21:09
$begingroup$
Yes, It was on two places! Only bad thing with copy paste is that it also applies to errors and typos.
$endgroup$
– Parseval
Mar 22 at 21:09
2
2
$begingroup$
Try evaluating at $x=pi$ instead? That should cancel away the minuses.
$endgroup$
– Semiclassical
Mar 22 at 21:20
$begingroup$
Try evaluating at $x=pi$ instead? That should cancel away the minuses.
$endgroup$
– Semiclassical
Mar 22 at 21:20
|
show 1 more comment
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Just to put in into an answer rather than into a comment I have to say that I am almost sure the only, and most likely intended way is to evaluate the series at $x=pi$, as pointed out by Semiclassical. This is yet alone the only possibilty to get rid of the $(-1)^n$ since this factor has nothing to do with the original function but more with underlying structure of the Fourier Coefficients.
A typical approach to find oscillating series, such as the one you derived from the non-oscillating one, is by playing the good old even odd cancelation game $($here similiar is done with the Riemann Zeta Function and its relative, the Dirichlet Eta Function$)$. However, applying this method to the given problem, and ignoring the constant factors for a moment, we get the following
$$underbrace{sum_{nge1}frac{(-1)^n}{pi^2+n^2}}_{=S_1}=underbrace{sum_{nge1}frac1{pi^2+n^2}}_{=S}-underbrace{2sum_{nge1}frac1{pi^2+(2n)^2}}_{=S_2}$$
Our main goal is to find $S$ wherease $S_1$ can be computed by your given formula. What remains to find is an expression for $S_2$. And from hereon we cannot get any further by only taking the Fourier Series Expansion of $f(x)=e^{pi x}$, at least as far as I can tell. One could use the expansion of $F(x)=e^{ax}$, for a positive real number $a$, instead and it is quite funny following this ansatz since it is way off what I think was intended by this question. Computing $c_n$ for $F(x)$ we obtain
$$F(x)=frac{sinh(api)}pisum_{ninmathbb Z}frac{color{red}{(-1)^n}}{a-in}e^{-inx}$$
Well, there is it again, the oscillating minus sign. However, note that for $a=fracpi2$ we are actually able to deduce an expression for $S_2$; by evaluating at $x=pi$ ... Moreover I am certainly sure that this is not the expected method, even though it works afterall.
Long story short: to deal with oscillating minus signs is easily done by splitting the sum up into even and odd parts but sometimes it makes the problem even more complicated than it actually is.
answered Mar 22 at 22:00
mrtaurhomrtaurho
6,15271641
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Thanks for this. You're absolutely right, it is not the expected method. Its much easier using Parsevals equation (not mine) or evaluating at $x=pi.$ However I ended up having a discussion with a classmate who thought it was impossible to do it by $x=0$ and now I can rub this answer in his face. Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Parseval
Mar 22 at 22:29
$begingroup$
@Parseval Always glad to help!
$endgroup$
– mrtaurho
Mar 22 at 22:31
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3158657%2fcompute-sum-n-geq1-frac1-pi2n2-by-expanding-e-pi-x-in-its-fouri%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Just to put in into an answer rather than into a comment I have to say that I am almost sure the only, and most likely intended way is to evaluate the series at $x=pi$, as pointed out by Semiclassical. This is yet alone the only possibilty to get rid of the $(-1)^n$ since this factor has nothing to do with the original function but more with underlying structure of the Fourier Coefficients.
A typical approach to find oscillating series, such as the one you derived from the non-oscillating one, is by playing the good old even odd cancelation game $($here similiar is done with the Riemann Zeta Function and its relative, the Dirichlet Eta Function$)$. However, applying this method to the given problem, and ignoring the constant factors for a moment, we get the following
$$underbrace{sum_{nge1}frac{(-1)^n}{pi^2+n^2}}_{=S_1}=underbrace{sum_{nge1}frac1{pi^2+n^2}}_{=S}-underbrace{2sum_{nge1}frac1{pi^2+(2n)^2}}_{=S_2}$$
Our main goal is to find $S$ wherease $S_1$ can be computed by your given formula. What remains to find is an expression for $S_2$. And from hereon we cannot get any further by only taking the Fourier Series Expansion of $f(x)=e^{pi x}$, at least as far as I can tell. One could use the expansion of $F(x)=e^{ax}$, for a positive real number $a$, instead and it is quite funny following this ansatz since it is way off what I think was intended by this question. Computing $c_n$ for $F(x)$ we obtain
$$F(x)=frac{sinh(api)}pisum_{ninmathbb Z}frac{color{red}{(-1)^n}}{a-in}e^{-inx}$$
Well, there is it again, the oscillating minus sign. However, note that for $a=fracpi2$ we are actually able to deduce an expression for $S_2$; by evaluating at $x=pi$ ... Moreover I am certainly sure that this is not the expected method, even though it works afterall.
Long story short: to deal with oscillating minus signs is easily done by splitting the sum up into even and odd parts but sometimes it makes the problem even more complicated than it actually is.
answered Mar 22 at 22:00
mrtaurhomrtaurho
6,15271641
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Thanks for this. You're absolutely right, it is not the expected method. Its much easier using Parsevals equation (not mine) or evaluating at $x=pi.$ However I ended up having a discussion with a classmate who thought it was impossible to do it by $x=0$ and now I can rub this answer in his face. Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Parseval
Mar 22 at 22:29
$begingroup$
@Parseval Always glad to help!
$endgroup$
– mrtaurho
Mar 22 at 22:31
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Just to put in into an answer rather than into a comment I have to say that I am almost sure the only, and most likely intended way is to evaluate the series at $x=pi$, as pointed out by Semiclassical. This is yet alone the only possibilty to get rid of the $(-1)^n$ since this factor has nothing to do with the original function but more with underlying structure of the Fourier Coefficients.
A typical approach to find oscillating series, such as the one you derived from the non-oscillating one, is by playing the good old even odd cancelation game $($here similiar is done with the Riemann Zeta Function and its relative, the Dirichlet Eta Function$)$. However, applying this method to the given problem, and ignoring the constant factors for a moment, we get the following
$$underbrace{sum_{nge1}frac{(-1)^n}{pi^2+n^2}}_{=S_1}=underbrace{sum_{nge1}frac1{pi^2+n^2}}_{=S}-underbrace{2sum_{nge1}frac1{pi^2+(2n)^2}}_{=S_2}$$
Our main goal is to find $S$ wherease $S_1$ can be computed by your given formula. What remains to find is an expression for $S_2$. And from hereon we cannot get any further by only taking the Fourier Series Expansion of $f(x)=e^{pi x}$, at least as far as I can tell. One could use the expansion of $F(x)=e^{ax}$, for a positive real number $a$, instead and it is quite funny following this ansatz since it is way off what I think was intended by this question. Computing $c_n$ for $F(x)$ we obtain
$$F(x)=frac{sinh(api)}pisum_{ninmathbb Z}frac{color{red}{(-1)^n}}{a-in}e^{-inx}$$
Well, there is it again, the oscillating minus sign. However, note that for $a=fracpi2$ we are actually able to deduce an expression for $S_2$; by evaluating at $x=pi$ ... Moreover I am certainly sure that this is not the expected method, even though it works afterall.
Long story short: to deal with oscillating minus signs is easily done by splitting the sum up into even and odd parts but sometimes it makes the problem even more complicated than it actually is.
answered Mar 22 at 22:00
mrtaurhomrtaurho
6,15271641
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Thanks for this. You're absolutely right, it is not the expected method. Its much easier using Parsevals equation (not mine) or evaluating at $x=pi.$ However I ended up having a discussion with a classmate who thought it was impossible to do it by $x=0$ and now I can rub this answer in his face. Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Parseval
Mar 22 at 22:29
$begingroup$
@Parseval Always glad to help!
$endgroup$
– mrtaurho
Mar 22 at 22:31
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Just to put in into an answer rather than into a comment I have to say that I am almost sure the only, and most likely intended way is to evaluate the series at $x=pi$, as pointed out by Semiclassical. This is yet alone the only possibilty to get rid of the $(-1)^n$ since this factor has nothing to do with the original function but more with underlying structure of the Fourier Coefficients.
A typical approach to find oscillating series, such as the one you derived from the non-oscillating one, is by playing the good old even odd cancelation game $($here similiar is done with the Riemann Zeta Function and its relative, the Dirichlet Eta Function$)$. However, applying this method to the given problem, and ignoring the constant factors for a moment, we get the following
$$underbrace{sum_{nge1}frac{(-1)^n}{pi^2+n^2}}_{=S_1}=underbrace{sum_{nge1}frac1{pi^2+n^2}}_{=S}-underbrace{2sum_{nge1}frac1{pi^2+(2n)^2}}_{=S_2}$$
Our main goal is to find $S$ wherease $S_1$ can be computed by your given formula. What remains to find is an expression for $S_2$. And from hereon we cannot get any further by only taking the Fourier Series Expansion of $f(x)=e^{pi x}$, at least as far as I can tell. One could use the expansion of $F(x)=e^{ax}$, for a positive real number $a$, instead and it is quite funny following this ansatz since it is way off what I think was intended by this question. Computing $c_n$ for $F(x)$ we obtain
$$F(x)=frac{sinh(api)}pisum_{ninmathbb Z}frac{color{red}{(-1)^n}}{a-in}e^{-inx}$$
Well, there is it again, the oscillating minus sign. However, note that for $a=fracpi2$ we are actually able to deduce an expression for $S_2$; by evaluating at $x=pi$ ... Moreover I am certainly sure that this is not the expected method, even though it works afterall.
Long story short: to deal with oscillating minus signs is easily done by splitting the sum up into even and odd parts but sometimes it makes the problem even more complicated than it actually is.
answered Mar 22 at 22:00
mrtaurhomrtaurho
6,15271641
$endgroup$
Just to put in into an answer rather than into a comment I have to say that I am almost sure the only, and most likely intended way is to evaluate the series at $x=pi$, as pointed out by Semiclassical. This is yet alone the only possibilty to get rid of the $(-1)^n$ since this factor has nothing to do with the original function but more with underlying structure of the Fourier Coefficients.
A typical approach to find oscillating series, such as the one you derived from the non-oscillating one, is by playing the good old even odd cancelation game $($here similiar is done with the Riemann Zeta Function and its relative, the Dirichlet Eta Function$)$. However, applying this method to the given problem, and ignoring the constant factors for a moment, we get the following
$$underbrace{sum_{nge1}frac{(-1)^n}{pi^2+n^2}}_{=S_1}=underbrace{sum_{nge1}frac1{pi^2+n^2}}_{=S}-underbrace{2sum_{nge1}frac1{pi^2+(2n)^2}}_{=S_2}$$
Our main goal is to find $S$ wherease $S_1$ can be computed by your given formula. What remains to find is an expression for $S_2$. And from hereon we cannot get any further by only taking the Fourier Series Expansion of $f(x)=e^{pi x}$, at least as far as I can tell. One could use the expansion of $F(x)=e^{ax}$, for a positive real number $a$, instead and it is quite funny following this ansatz since it is way off what I think was intended by this question. Computing $c_n$ for $F(x)$ we obtain
$$F(x)=frac{sinh(api)}pisum_{ninmathbb Z}frac{color{red}{(-1)^n}}{a-in}e^{-inx}$$
Well, there is it again, the oscillating minus sign. However, note that for $a=fracpi2$ we are actually able to deduce an expression for $S_2$; by evaluating at $x=pi$ ... Moreover I am certainly sure that this is not the expected method, even though it works afterall.
Long story short: to deal with oscillating minus signs is easily done by splitting the sum up into even and odd parts but sometimes it makes the problem even more complicated than it actually is.
answered Mar 22 at 22:00
mrtaurhomrtaurho
6,15271641
answered Mar 22 at 22:00
mrtaurhomrtaurho
6,15271641
answered Mar 22 at 22:00
mrtaurhomrtaurho
6,15271641
answered Mar 22 at 22:00
mrtaurhomrtaurho
6,15271641
6,15271641
1
$begingroup$
Thanks for this. You're absolutely right, it is not the expected method. Its much easier using Parsevals equation (not mine) or evaluating at $x=pi.$ However I ended up having a discussion with a classmate who thought it was impossible to do it by $x=0$ and now I can rub this answer in his face. Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Parseval
Mar 22 at 22:29
$begingroup$
@Parseval Always glad to help!
$endgroup$
– mrtaurho
Mar 22 at 22:31
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
Thanks for this. You're absolutely right, it is not the expected method. Its much easier using Parsevals equation (not mine) or evaluating at $x=pi.$ However I ended up having a discussion with a classmate who thought it was impossible to do it by $x=0$ and now I can rub this answer in his face. Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Parseval
Mar 22 at 22:29
$begingroup$
@Parseval Always glad to help!
$endgroup$
– mrtaurho
Mar 22 at 22:31
1
1
$begingroup$
Thanks for this. You're absolutely right, it is not the expected method. Its much easier using Parsevals equation (not mine) or evaluating at $x=pi.$ However I ended up having a discussion with a classmate who thought it was impossible to do it by $x=0$ and now I can rub this answer in his face. Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Parseval
Mar 22 at 22:29
$begingroup$
Thanks for this. You're absolutely right, it is not the expected method. Its much easier using Parsevals equation (not mine) or evaluating at $x=pi.$ However I ended up having a discussion with a classmate who thought it was impossible to do it by $x=0$ and now I can rub this answer in his face. Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Parseval
Mar 22 at 22:29
$begingroup$
@Parseval Always glad to help!
$endgroup$
– mrtaurho
Mar 22 at 22:31
$begingroup$
@Parseval Always glad to help!
$endgroup$
– mrtaurho
Mar 22 at 22:31
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3158657%2fcompute-sum-n-geq1-frac1-pi2n2-by-expanding-e-pi-x-in-its-fouri%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
There is a typo. The computed coefficient should be $$c_n=frac{sinh(pi^2)}pifrac{(-1)^color{red}{n}}{pi-in}$$ It is of minor matter since you used the right coefficient later on but I was pretty confused in the first place by this typo.
$endgroup$
– mrtaurho
Mar 22 at 21:07
$begingroup$
Fixed it just before you wrote that comment :P My apologies!
$endgroup$
– Parseval
Mar 22 at 21:07
$begingroup$
It is still there ;) Within your computation of $c_n$ aswell as your definition of $f(x)$
$endgroup$
– mrtaurho
Mar 22 at 21:08
3
$begingroup$
Yes, It was on two places! Only bad thing with copy paste is that it also applies to errors and typos.
$endgroup$
– Parseval
Mar 22 at 21:09
2
$begingroup$
Try evaluating at $x=pi$ instead? That should cancel away the minuses.
$endgroup$
– Semiclassical
Mar 22 at 21:20