Mathematics · Book 5 · Bachelor Year 3

University Mathematics — Year 3

University Mathematics — Year 3 · Bachelor Year 3

17Laurent Series and the Residue Theorem

What happens to a holomorphic function near a point where it is not defined? The answer is a complete trichotomy — removable point, pole, or essential singularity — read off a two-sided power series, the Laurent expansion. One coefficient of that expansion, the residue, controls every contour integral around the singularity: the residue theorem converts hard definite integrals into finite algebra, counts zeros of functions (argument principle, Rouché), and proves the open mapping theorem. We first upgrade Cauchy’s theorem from star-shaped domains to its definitive, homology-free form — Dixon’s elegant argument — so that all contours with winding number zero around the complement become available.

17.1 The global Cauchy theorem

A cycle Γ\Gamma is a finite formal sum of closed paths γ1,…,γm\gamma_1, \dots, \gamma_m; integrals and indices along Γ\Gamma are the corresponding sums, and im⁡Γ=⋃im⁡γj\operatorname{im}\Gamma = \bigcup\operatorname{im}\gamma_j.

Theorem 17.1 (Cauchy, global form)

Let Ω⊆C\Omega \subseteq \C be open, f∈H(Ω)f \in \mathcal H(\Omega), and Γ\Gamma a cycle in Ω\Omega such that

Ind⁡Γ(w)=0for every w∉Ω.\operatorname{Ind}_\Gamma(w) = 0 \qquad\text{for every } w \notin \Omega .

Then, for all z∈Ω∖im⁡Γz \in \Omega\setminus\operatorname{im}\Gamma,

12iπ∫Γf(w)w−z  ⁣dw=Ind⁡Γ(z) f(z),and∫Γf(w)  ⁣dw=0.\frac1{2\iu\pi}\int_\Gamma\frac{f(w)}{w - z}\,\dd w = \operatorname{Ind}_\Gamma(z)\,f(z), \qquad\text{and}\qquad \int_\Gamma f(w)\,\dd w = 0 .

Proof (Dixon). Define g ⁣:Ω×Ω→Cg \colon \Omega\times\Omega \to \C by

g(z,w)={f(w)−f(z)w−zw≠z,f′(z)w=z.g(z, w) = \begin{cases} \dfrac{f(w) - f(z)}{w - z} & w \neq z,\\[4pt] f'(z) & w = z . \end{cases}

gg is continuous: off the diagonal, clear. Near a diagonal point (a,a)(a, a), expand ff in a power series at aa (Theorem 16.10): f(w)−f(z)=∑n≥1cn((w−a)n−(z−a)n)f(w) - f(z) = \sum_{n\geq1}c_n\bigl((w-a)^n - (z-a)^n\bigr), and dividing each term by w−zw - z (factorization of un−vnu^n - v^n) gives, for z,w∈D(a,r)z, w \in D(a, r),

g(z,w)=∑n≥1cn∑j=0n−1(w−a) j(z−a) n−1−j,g(z, w) = \sum_{n\geq1}c_n\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}(w-a)^{\,j}(z-a)^{\,n-1-j},

valid also on the diagonal (each inner sum becomes n(z−a)n−1n(z-a)^{n-1}, summing to f′(z)f'(z)). For rr small the series converges uniformly on D(a,r)2D(a,r)^2 (∣term∣≤n∣cn∣rn−1\abs{\text{term}} \leq n\abs{c_n}r^{n-1}, summable inside the radius): the sum is continuous.

Set h(z)=12iπ∫Γg(z,w)  ⁣dwh(z) = \frac1{2\iu\pi}\int_\Gamma g(z, w)\,\dd w on Ω\Omega: continuous (uniform continuity of gg on compacts), and holomorphic — by Morera (Theorem 16.15’s criterion): for a triangle T⊆ΩT \subseteq \Omega, Fubini gives ∫∂Th=12iπ∫Γ(∫∂Tg(z,w) ⁣dz) ⁣dw=0\int_{\partial T}h = \frac1{2\iu\pi}\int_\Gamma\bigl(\int_{\partial T}g(z, w)\dd z\bigr)\dd w = 0, the inner integral vanishing because z↦g(z,w)z \mapsto g(z, w) is holomorphic on Ω\Omega (at z=wz = w the singularity is removable: gg is continuous there and holomorphic elsewhere — the extension argument of Theorem 16.9’s proof).

On the open set Ω′={z∉im⁡Γ:Ind⁡Γ(z)=0}\Omega' = \{z \notin \operatorname{im}\Gamma : \operatorname{Ind}_\Gamma(z) = 0\}, define h1(z)=12iπ∫Γf(w)w−z ⁣dwh_1(z) = \frac1{2\iu\pi}\int_\Gamma\frac{f(w)}{w - z}\dd w: holomorphic on Ω′\Omega' (Morera or differentiation under the integral). For z∈Ω∩Ω′z \in \Omega\cap\Omega':

h(z)=12iπ∫Γf(w)w−z ⁣dw−f(z)Ind⁡Γ(z)=h1(z).h(z) = \frac1{2\iu\pi}\int_\Gamma\frac{f(w)}{w-z}\dd w - f(z)\operatorname{Ind}_\Gamma(z) = h_1(z) .

By hypothesis Ω∪Ω′=C\Omega\cup\Omega' = \C (w∉Ω⇒Ind⁡Γ(w)=0w \notin \Omega \Rightarrow \operatorname{Ind}_\Gamma(w) = 0), so hh and h1h_1 glue to an entire function HH. Since the unbounded component of the complement of im⁡Γ\operatorname{im}\Gamma lies in Ω′\Omega' and h1(z)→0h_1(z) \to 0 as ∣z∣→∞\abs z \to \infty (ML bound), HH is bounded and tends to 00: Liouville (Corollary 16.12) gives H≡0H \equiv 0. Thus h≡0h \equiv 0 on Ω\Omega, which is the integral formula. Applying it, for fixed a∈Ω∖im⁡Γa \in \Omega\setminus\operatorname{im}\Gamma, to f~(w)=(w−a)f(w)\tilde f(w) = (w - a)f(w) at z=az = a:

12iπ∫Γf(w) ⁣dw=12iπ∫Γf~(w)w−a ⁣dw=Ind⁡Γ(a) f~(a)=0.\frac1{2\iu\pi}\int_\Gamma f(w)\dd w = \frac1{2\iu\pi}\int_\Gamma \frac{\tilde f(w)}{w - a}\dd w = \operatorname{Ind}_\Gamma(a)\,\tilde f(a) = 0 .

∎

17.2 Laurent series and isolated singularities

Theorem 17.2 (Laurent expansion)

Let ff be holomorphic on the annulus A={r<∣z−a∣<R}A = \{r < \abs{z - a} < R\} (0≤r<R≤∞0 \leq r < R \leq \infty). Then

f(z)=∑n∈Zcn (z−a)non A,cn=12iπ∫Cρf(w)(w−a)n+1  ⁣dwf(z) = \sum_{n\in\Z}c_n\,(z - a)^n \qquad\text{on } A, \qquad c_n = \frac1{2\iu\pi}\int_{C_\rho}\frac{f(w)}{(w - a)^{n+1}}\,\dd w

for any r<ρ<Rr < \rho < R (independent of ρ\rho), the two half-series converging normally on compact subannuli. The expansion is unique.

Proof. Fix r<ρ1<∣z−a∣<ρ2<Rr < \rho_1 < \abs{z - a} < \rho_2 < R and let Γ=Cρ2−Cρ1\Gamma = C_{\rho_2} - C_{\rho_1} (outer counterclockwise, inner clockwise): a cycle in AA with Ind⁡Γ(w)=0\operatorname{Ind}_\Gamma(w) = 0 for all w∉Aw \notin A (points inside the small disc: 1−1=01 - 1 = 0; outside the big one: 0−00 - 0). By Theorem 17.1, Ind⁡Γ(z)=1−0=1\operatorname{Ind}_\Gamma(z) = 1 - 0 = 1 gives

f(z)=12iπ∫Cρ2f(w)w−z ⁣dw−12iπ∫Cρ1f(w)w−z ⁣dw.f(z) = \frac1{2\iu\pi}\int_{C_{\rho_2}}\frac{f(w)}{w - z}\dd w - \frac1{2\iu\pi}\int_{C_{\rho_1}}\frac{f(w)}{w - z}\dd w .

Expand the first kernel as in Theorem 16.10 (powers of z−aw−a\frac{z - a}{w - a}, modulus <1< 1): the nonnegative part ∑n≥0cn(z−a)n\sum_{n\geq0}c_n(z-a)^n. In the second, expand the other way: −1w−z=1(z−a)(1−w−az−a)=∑m≥0(w−a)m(z−a)m+1\frac{-1}{w - z} = \frac1{(z-a)(1 - \frac{w - a}{z - a})} = \sum_{m\geq0}\frac{(w-a)^m}{(z - a)^{m+1}}, normally convergent on Cρ1C_{\rho_1}: the negative part ∑n≤−1cn(z−a)n\sum_{n\leq-1}c_n(z-a)^n with the stated coefficients (index n=−m−1n = -m-1). Independence of ρ\rho: the coefficient integrals over CρC_{\rho} and Cρ′C_{\rho'} differ by ∫Γ\int_\Gamma over a null-index cycle of the holomorphic f(w)(w−a)n+1\frac{f(w)}{(w-a)^{n+1}} in AA: zero, by Theorem 17.1 again. Uniqueness: integrate ∑cn(z−a)n\sum c_n(z-a)^n against (z−a)−m−1(z - a)^{-m-1} over CρC_\rho term by term (normal convergence): only n=mn = m survives. ∎

Definition 17.3

If ff is holomorphic on a punctured disc D(a,R)∖{a}D(a, R)\setminus \{a\}, expand by Laurent (r=0r = 0). Three exclusive cases:

  • all cn=0c_n = 0 for n<0n < 0: removable singularity (the nonnegative series extends ff holomorphically to aa);
  • cn≠0c_n \neq 0 for finitely many, at least one, n<0n < 0: a pole of order m=−min⁡{n:cn≠0}m = -\min\{n : c_n \neq 0\}; equivalently f=g/(z−a)mf = g/(z-a)^m, gg holomorphic, g(a)≠0g(a) \neq 0; equivalently ∣f(z)∣→∞\abs{f(z)} \to \infty as z→az\to a;
  • infinitely many negative cn≠0c_n \neq 0: essential singularity.

The residue is Res⁡(f,a)=c−1\operatorname{Res}(f, a) = c_{-1}. A function holomorphic on Ω\Omega minus a set of poles is meromorphic on Ω\Omega.

Theorem 17.4 (Riemann; Casorati–Weierstrass)

Let ff be holomorphic on D(a,R)∖{a}D(a,R)\setminus\{a\}.

  1. (Riemann) If ff is bounded near aa, the singularity is removable.
  2. (Casorati–Weierstrass) If aa is essential, then f(D(a,ε)∖{a})f\bigl(D(a,\varepsilon)\setminus\{a\}\bigr) is dense in C\C for every ε\varepsilon.

Proof. (1) For n<0n < 0 and ρ→0\rho \to 0: ∣cn∣≤Mρ−n−1⋅ρ⋅ρ− n…\abs{c_n} \leq M\rho^{-n-1}\cdot\rho\cdot\rho^{-\,n}\dots by ML on CρC_\rho: ∣cn∣≤12π 2πρ⋅Mρ−(n+1)=Mρ−n→0\abs{c_n} \leq \frac{1}{2\pi}\,2\pi\rho\cdot M\rho^{-(n+1)} = M\rho^{-n} \to 0 (as −n>0-n > 0): all negative coefficients vanish. (2) If some value bb were not approached: ∣f−b∣≥δ\abs{f - b} \geq \delta near aa, so g=1/(f−b)g = 1/(f - b) is holomorphic and bounded near aa: removable (1), gg extends with value cc. If c≠0c \neq 0, f=b+1/gf = b + 1/g is bounded near aa: removable — excluded. If c=0c = 0, gg has a zero of finite order mm at aa (Theorem 16.13; g≢0g \not\equiv 0), and f=b+1/gf = b + 1/g has a pole of order mm: excluded again. ∎

17.3 The residue theorem

Theorem 17.5 (Residue theorem)

Let Ω\Omega be open, S⊆ΩS \subseteq \Omega finite, f∈H(Ω∖S)f \in \mathcal H(\Omega\setminus S), and Γ\Gamma a cycle in Ω∖S\Omega\setminus S with Ind⁡Γ(w)=0\operatorname{Ind}_\Gamma(w) = 0 for every w∉Ωw \notin \Omega. Then

12iπ∫Γf(z)  ⁣dz=∑a∈SInd⁡Γ(a) Res⁡(f,a).\frac{1}{2\iu\pi}\int_\Gamma f(z)\,\dd z = \sum_{a\in S}\operatorname{Ind}_\Gamma(a)\, \operatorname{Res}(f, a) .

Proof. For each a∈Sa \in S, let Pa(z)=∑n≤−1cn(a)(z−a)nP_a(z) = \sum_{n\leq-1}c_n^{(a)}(z - a)^n be the principal part of ff at aa: a series converging on C∖{a}\C\setminus\{a\} (its radius in 1/(z−a)1/(z-a) is infinite: the Laurent tail converges for all small ∣z−a∣\abs{z-a} hence, being a power series in (z−a)−1(z-a)^{-1}, everywhere), and holomorphic there. Then g=f−∑a∈SPag = f - \sum_{a\in S}P_a has removable singularities at each point of SS (its Laurent expansion at aa has no negative part: the other Pa′P_{a'} are holomorphic at aa), so gg extends holomorphically to Ω\Omega, and Theorem 17.1 gives ∫Γg=0\int_\Gamma g = 0. It remains to integrate each PaP_a: term-by-term (normal convergence on the compact im⁡Γ\operatorname{im}\Gamma, which avoids aa),

12iπ∫Γ(z−a)n  ⁣dz=0 (n≤−2:primitive (z−a)n+1n+1),12iπ∫Γ ⁣dzz−a=Ind⁡Γ(a),\frac1{2\iu\pi}\int_\Gamma(z - a)^n\,\dd z = 0 \ (n \leq -2: \text{primitive } \tfrac{(z-a)^{n+1}}{n+1}), \qquad \frac1{2\iu\pi}\int_\Gamma\frac{\dd z}{z - a} = \operatorname{Ind}_\Gamma(a),

so 12iπ∫ΓPa=c−1(a)Ind⁡Γ(a)\frac1{2\iu\pi}\int_\Gamma P_a = c_{-1}^{(a)}\operatorname{Ind}_\Gamma(a). Sum over aa. ∎

Method 17.6 (Computing residues)

Simple pole: Res⁡(f,a)=lim⁡z→a(z−a)f(z)\operatorname{Res}(f, a) = \lim_{z\to a}(z - a)f(z); for f=g/hf = g/h with g(a)≠0g(a) \neq 0, h(a)=0h(a) = 0, h′(a)≠0h'(a) \neq 0: Res⁡=g(a)/h′(a)\operatorname{Res} = g(a)/h'(a). Pole of order mm: Res⁡(f,a)=1(m−1)!lim⁡z→a((z−a)mf(z))(m−1)\operatorname{Res}(f, a) = \frac1{(m-1)!}\lim_{z\to a}\bigl((z-a)^mf(z)\bigr)^{(m-1)}. Essential singularities: expand and read c−1c_{-1} (e.g. from known series). Always verify which poles the contour actually encircles, and with which index.

Example 17.7 (The four classical integral types)

(a) Rational over R\R: for ∫R ⁣dx1+x4\int_\R\frac{\dd x}{1 + x^4}, close with a large semicircle SRS_R in the upper half-plane: the integrand is O(R−4)O(R^{-4}) there, so ∫SR→0\int_{S_R} \to 0 (ML), and the residue theorem with the poles eiπ/4,e3iπ/4\eu^{\iu\pi/4}, \eu^{3\iu\pi/4} (simple, residues 14z3=z4z4=−z4\frac1{4z^3} = \frac{z}{4z^4} = -\frac z4 at a pole) gives

∫R ⁣dx1+x4=2iπ(−eiπ/44−e3iπ/44)=π2.\int_\R\frac{\dd x}{1 + x^4} = 2\iu\pi\Bigl(-\frac{\eu^{\iu\pi/4}}4 - \frac{\eu^{3\iu\pi/4}}4\Bigr) = \frac{\pi}{\sqrt2} .

(b) Fourier type: for t≥0t \geq 0, ∫Reitx1+x2 ⁣dx=2iπRes⁡(eitz1+z2,i)=2iπe−t2i=πe−t\int_\R\frac{\eu^{\iu tx}}{1 + x^2}\dd x = 2\iu\pi\operatorname{Res}\bigl(\tfrac{\eu^{\iu tz}}{1+z^2}, \iu\bigr) = 2\iu\pi\frac{\eu^{-t}}{2\iu} = \pi\eu^{-t} — the upper semicircle works because ∣eitz∣=e−tIm⁡z≤1\abs{\eu^{\iu tz}} = \eu^{-t\operatorname{Im}z} \leq 1 there; taking real parts: ∫Rcos⁡(tx)1+x2 ⁣dx=πe−∣t∣\int_\R\frac{\cos(tx)}{1+x^2}\dd x = \pi\eu^{-\abs t}, settling Exercise 10.10’s admitted formula. (c) Trigonometric over a period: substitute z=eitz = \eu^{\iu t}, cos⁡t=z+z−12\cos t = \frac{z + z^{-1}}2,  ⁣dt= ⁣dziz\dd t = \frac{\dd z}{\iu z}: ∫02π ⁣dta+cos⁡t\int_0^{2\pi}\frac{\dd t}{a + \cos t} (a>1a > 1) becomes a residue count inside the unit circle (Exercise 17.2). (d) Series: pair ff with πcot⁡(πz)\pi\cot(\pi z), whose poles are the integers with residue 11: the weekend problem sums ∑n−2\sum n^{-2} and ∑n−4\sum n^{-4} this way.

The semicircle contour for ∈t_ℝ x/1 + x4: as R ∈fty the arc contributes O(R-3), and the residue theorem counts the two enclosed poles (blue). The two lower poles (gray) are outside: index 0.
The semicircle contour for ∫R ⁣dx1+x4\int_\R\frac{\dd x}{1 + x^4}: as R→∞R \to \infty the arc contributes O(R−3)O(R^{-3}), and the residue theorem counts the two enclosed poles (blue). The two lower poles (gray) are outside: index 00.

17.4 The argument principle and Rouché’s theorem

Theorem 17.8 (Argument principle)

Let ff be meromorphic on Ω\Omega, with zeros zjz_j (orders mjm_j) and poles pkp_k (orders μk\mu_k), and γ\gamma a closed path in Ω\Omega avoiding them all, with Ind⁡γ=0\operatorname{Ind}_\gamma = 0 off Ω\Omega. Then

12iπ∫γf′(z)f(z)  ⁣dz=∑jmjInd⁡γ(zj)−∑kμkInd⁡γ(pk)\frac1{2\iu\pi}\int_\gamma\frac{f'(z)}{f(z)}\,\dd z = \sum_j m_j\operatorname{Ind}_\gamma(z_j) - \sum_k \mu_k\operatorname{Ind}_\gamma(p_k)

(finitely many terms are nonzero). For a simple counterclockwise contour, the integral counts zeros minus poles inside, with multiplicity — and equals the winding number of the image path f∘γf\circ\gamma around 00.

Proof. Near a zero of order mm: f=(z−a)mgf = (z-a)^mg, g(a)≠0g(a) \neq 0, so f′f=mz−a+g′g\frac{f'}f = \frac m{z - a} + \frac{g'}g with the second term holomorphic near aa: a simple pole of residue mm. Near a pole of order μ\mu: f=(z−a)−μgf = (z-a)^{-\mu}g gives residue −μ-\mu. Elsewhere f′f\frac{f'}f is holomorphic. (The zeros and poles with nonzero index lie in a compact region encircled by γ\gamma; by the identity theorem they are finite in number there, f≢0f \not\equiv 0.) Apply Theorem 17.5. The last remark: 12iπ∫γf′f=12iπ∫f∘γ ⁣dww=Ind⁡f∘γ(0)\frac1{2\iu\pi}\int_\gamma\frac{f'}f = \frac1{2\iu\pi}\int_{f\circ\gamma}\frac{\dd w}w = \operatorname{Ind}_{f\circ\gamma}(0) (substitute w=f(γ(t))w = f(\gamma(t))). ∎

Theorem 17.9 (Rouché)

Let f,gf, g be holomorphic on Ω\Omega, and γ\gamma a closed path with Ind⁡γ∈{0,1}\operatorname{Ind}_\gamma \in \{0,1\}, zero off Ω\Omega (a simple contour). If

∣g(z)∣<∣f(z)∣on im⁡γ,\abs{g(z)} < \abs{f(z)} \qquad \text{on } \operatorname{im}\gamma,

then ff and f+gf + g have the same number of zeros (with multiplicity) in the region {Ind⁡γ=1}\{\operatorname{Ind}_\gamma = 1\}.

Proof. For t∈[0, 1]t \in \intcc01, ft=f+tgf_t = f + tg has no zero on im⁡γ\operatorname{im}\gamma (∣ft∣≥∣f∣−∣g∣>0\abs{f_t} \geq \abs f - \abs g > 0), so

N(t)=12iπ∫γft′(z)ft(z)  ⁣dzN(t) = \frac1{2\iu\pi}\int_\gamma \frac{f_t'(z)}{f_t(z)}\,\dd z

is well defined; it counts the zeros in the enclosed region (Theorem 17.8; no poles). NN is continuous in tt (the integrand is jointly continuous, the denominators uniformly bounded below — dominated convergence) and integer-valued: constant. N(0)=N(1)N(0) = N(1). ∎

Corollary 17.10 (Open mapping theorem)

A nonconstant holomorphic function on a connected open set is an open map. In particular (again) the maximum principle holds, and a holomorphic bijection has holomorphic inverse.

Proof. Let f(a)=bf(a) = b; f−bf - b has a zero of some finite order m≥1m \geq 1 at aa (identity theorem: f≢bf \not\equiv b). Choose rr with f−bf - b zero-free on Dˉ(a,r)∖{a}\bar D(a, r)\setminus\{a\} (isolated zeros) and let δ=min⁡∣z−a∣=r∣f(z)−b∣>0\delta = \min_{\abs{z - a} = r}\abs{f(z) - b} > 0. For ∣w−b∣<δ\abs{w - b} < \delta: on the circle, ∣(b−w)∣<δ≤∣f−b∣\abs{(b - w)} < \delta \leq \abs{f - b}, so Rouché (f−bf - b versus constant b−wb - w) says f−wf - w has exactly mm zeros in D(a,r)D(a, r): every such ww is attained — f(D(a,r))⊇D(b,δ)f(D(a,r)) \supseteq D(b, \delta): open. Maximum principle: an interior maximum of ∣f∣\abs f is impossible for a nonconstant ff, its image around f(a)f(a) containing points of larger modulus. Inverse: a holomorphic bijection ff is open, so f−1f^{-1} is continuous; the zero of f−f(a)f - f(a) at aa is simple (m≥2m \geq 2 would give mm preimages of nearby values — distinct ones, since f′f' vanishes only at isolated points, so near aa the mm zeros of f−wf - w are simple and distinct for generic small ww: contradiction with injectivity); then f′(a)≠0f'(a) \neq 0 and the difference quotient of f−1f^{-1} converges: (f−1)′(b)=1/f′(a)\bigl(f^{-1}\bigr)'(b) = 1/f'(a). ∎

17.5 Exercises

Exercise 17.1 ★

Classify the singularity at 00 and compute the residue:

sin⁡zz,ez−1z2,1z(z−1)2,cos⁡zz3,e1/z,1sin⁡z.\frac{\sin z}{z},\qquad \frac{\eu^z - 1}{z^2},\qquad \frac{1}{z(z-1)^2},\qquad \frac{\cos z}{z^3},\qquad \eu^{1/z},\qquad \frac1{\sin z} .

Also give the residue of the third at z=1z = 1 and of the last at z=πz = \pi.

Solution

Solution of Exercise 17.1.

sin⁡zz=1−z26+⋯\frac{\sin z}z = 1 - \frac{z^2}6 + \cdots: removable, residue 00. ez−1z2=1z+12+z6+⋯\frac{\eu^z - 1}{z^2} = \frac1z + \frac12 + \frac z6 + \cdots: simple pole, residue 11. 1z(z−1)2\frac1{z(z-1)^2}: simple pole at 00 with residue 1(0−1)2=1\frac1{(0-1)^2} = 1; double pole at 11 with residue  ⁣d ⁣dz(1z)∣z=1=−1\frac{\dd}{\dd z}\bigl(\frac1z\bigr)\big|_{z=1} = -1. cos⁡zz3=1z3−12z+⋯\frac{\cos z}{z^3} = \frac1{z^3} - \frac1{2z} + \cdots: pole of order 33, residue −12-\frac12. e1/z=∑n≥0z−nn!\eu^{1/z} = \sum_{n\geq0} \frac{z^{-n}}{n!}: essential, residue 11. 1sin⁡z\frac1{\sin z}: simple poles at nπn\pi; residue 1cos⁡0=1\frac1{\cos 0} = 1 at 00, 1cos⁡π=−1\frac1{\cos\pi} = -1 at π\pi (Method 17.6, g/h′g/h').

Exercise 17.2 ★

For a>1a > 1 compute, via z=eitz = \eu^{\iu t}:

∫02π ⁣dta+cos⁡t=2πa2−1.\int_0^{2\pi}\frac{\dd t}{a + \cos t} = \frac{2\pi}{\sqrt{a^2 - 1}} .

Check the limit behaviors a→1+a \to 1^+ and a→∞a \to \infty.

Solution

Solution of Exercise 17.2.

With z=eitz = \eu^{\iu t}, cos⁡t=z+z−12\cos t = \frac{z + z^{-1}}2,  ⁣dt= ⁣dziz\dd t = \frac{\dd z}{\iu z}:

∫02π ⁣dta+cos⁡t=∮∣z∣=12  ⁣dzi (z2+2az+1).\int_0^{2\pi}\frac{\dd t}{a + \cos t} = \oint_{\abs z = 1}\frac{2\,\dd z}{\iu\,(z^2 + 2az + 1)} .

The roots z±=−a±a2−1z_\pm = -a \pm \sqrt{a^2 - 1} satisfy z+z−=1z_+z_- = 1 with ∣z+∣<1<∣z−∣\abs{z_+} < 1 < \abs{z_-}; the residue at z+z_+ is 1z+−z−=12a2−1\frac{1}{z_+ - z_-} = \frac1{2\sqrt{a^2-1}}, so the integral is 2i⋅2iπ⋅12a2−1=2πa2−1\frac2\iu\cdot2\iu\pi\cdot\frac1{2\sqrt{a^2-1}} = \frac{2\pi}{\sqrt{a^2-1}}. As a→1+a \to 1^+ it blows up (the integrand peaks at t=πt = \pi); as a→∞a \to \infty it behaves like 2πa\frac{2\pi}a, matching ∫ ⁣dta\int\frac{\dd t}a.

Exercise 17.3 ★★

Compute with semicircle contours, justifying the arc estimates:

∫Rx21+x6  ⁣dx=π3,∫R ⁣dx(1+x2)2=π2(re-deriving Exercise 14.3).\int_\R\frac{x^2}{1 + x^6}\,\dd x = \frac\pi3, \qquad \int_\R\frac{\dd x}{(1 + x^2)^{2}} = \frac\pi2 \quad\text{(re-deriving \text{Exercise 14.3})}.
Solution

Solution of Exercise 17.3.

First integral: upper poles of z21+z6\frac{z^2}{1+z^6} at p=eiπ/6,i,e5iπ/6p = \eu^{\iu\pi/6}, \iu, \eu^{5\iu\pi/6}; at each, Res⁡=p26p5=p36p6=−p36\operatorname{Res} = \frac{p^2}{6p^5} = \frac{p^3}{6p^6} = -\frac{p^3}6, and p3p^3 takes the values i,−i,i\iu, -\iu, \iu: sum of residues −i6-\frac{\iu}{6}. The arc is O(R−4)⋅O(R)→0O(R^{-4})\cdot O(R) \to 0:

∫Rx2  ⁣dx1+x6=2iπ(−i6)=π3.\int_\R\frac{x^2\,\dd x}{1 + x^6} = 2\iu\pi\Bigl(-\frac \iu6\Bigr) = \frac\pi3 .

Second: double pole at i\iu of 1(1+z2)2=1(z−i)2(z+i)2\frac1{(1+z^2)^2} = \frac1{(z-\iu)^2(z+\iu)^2}:

Res⁡= ⁣d ⁣dz (z+i)−2∣z=i=−2(2i)3=−2−8i=−i4,∫R ⁣dx(1+x2)2=2iπ⋅(−i4)=π2,\operatorname{Res} = \frac{\dd}{\dd z}\,(z + \iu)^{-2}\Big|_{z=\iu} = \frac{-2}{(2\iu)^3} = \frac{-2}{-8\iu} = -\frac\iu4, \qquad \int_\R\frac{\dd x}{(1+x^2)^2} = 2\iu\pi\cdot\Bigl(-\frac\iu4\Bigr) = \frac\pi2 ,

consistent with Exercise 14.3(b).

Exercise 17.4 ★★

Prove, for t≥0t \geq 0 and a>0a > 0:

∫Rcos⁡(tx)x2+a2  ⁣dx=πa e−at,\int_\R\frac{\cos(tx)}{x^2 + a^2}\,\dd x = \frac{\pi}{a}\,\eu^{-at},

and deduce the Fourier transform of x↦e−a∣x∣x \mapsto \eu^{-a\abs x} by inversion — comparing with Exercise 14.1.

Solution

Solution of Exercise 17.4.

Close eitzz2+a2\frac{\eu^{\iu tz}}{z^2 + a^2} in the upper half-plane (t≥0t \geq 0): there ∣eitz∣=e−tIm⁡z≤1\abs{\eu^{\iu tz}} = \eu^{-t\operatorname{Im}z} \leq 1, so the arc contributes O(R−2)⋅O(R)→0O(R^{-2})\cdot O(R) \to 0. The single enclosed pole ia\iu a is simple with residue e−at2ia\frac{\eu^{-at}}{2\iu a}:

∫Reitxx2+a2 ⁣dx=πa e−at,hence∫Rcos⁡(tx)x2+a2 ⁣dx=πa e−a∣t∣\int_\R\frac{\eu^{\iu tx}}{x^2 + a^2}\dd x = \frac{\pi}{a}\,\eu^{-at}, \qquad\text{hence}\qquad \int_\R\frac{\cos(tx)}{x^2+a^2}\dd x = \frac\pi a\,\eu^{-a\abs t}

(real part; even in tt). This is the inversion counterpart of e−a∣x∣^=2aa2+ξ2\widehat{\eu^{-a\abs x}} = \frac{2a}{a^2+\xi^2} (Exercise 14.1): the two computations confirm each other through Theorem 14.5.

Exercise 17.5 ★★

Expand f(z)=1(z−1)(z−2)f(z) = \dfrac1{(z-1)(z-2)} in Laurent series in each of the three regions ∣z∣<1\abs z < 1, 1<∣z∣<21 < \abs z < 2, ∣z∣>2\abs z > 2. Why do the three expansions differ? Explain why the coefficient of z−1z^{-1} in the second and third expansions is not a residue of ff at 00 (ff has no singularity there), and compute the actual residues of ff, at 11 and at 22.

Solution

Solution of Exercise 17.5.

Partial fractions: f=1z−2−1z−1f = \frac1{z-2} - \frac1{z-1}. On ∣z∣<1\abs z < 1 (Taylor): f=∑n≥0(1−2−n−1)znf = \sum_{n\geq0}\bigl(1 - 2^{-n-1}\bigr)z^n. On 1<∣z∣<21 < \abs z < 2: 1z−2=−∑n≥0zn2n+1\frac1{z-2} = -\sum_{n\geq0}\frac{z^n}{2^{n+1}} and −1z−1=−∑n≥1z−n-\frac1{z-1} = -\sum_{n\geq1}z^{-n}: a genuine two-sided series. On ∣z∣>2\abs z > 2: f=∑n≥1(2n−1−1)z−nf = \sum_{n\geq1}\bigl(2^{n-1} - 1\bigr)z^{-n}. The three differ because Laurent expansions are attached to annuli, not points: each region has its own geometric expansions. The z−1z^{-1}-coefficients (−1-1 and 00 respectively) are integrals over circles encircling the singularities inside, not residues at 00 (ff is holomorphic at 00): for 1<∣z∣<21 < \abs z < 2 the coefficient −1-1 is Res⁡(f,1)\operatorname{Res}(f, 1); for ∣z∣>2\abs z > 2 the coefficient 00 is Res⁡(f,1)+Res⁡(f,2)=−1+1\operatorname{Res}(f,1) + \operatorname{Res}(f,2) = -1 + 1. The residues of ff: −1-1 at 11 and +1+1 at 22.

Exercise 17.6 ★★

(a) Show that e1/z\eu^{1/z} has an essential singularity at 00 and verify Casorati–Weierstrass by hand: solve e1/z=w\eu^{1/z} = w explicitly for any w≠0w \neq 0, exhibiting solutions arbitrarily close to 00. (b) Show that ∣e1/z∣\abs{\eu^{1/z}} is unbounded on every punctured neighborhood of 00 yet e1/z\eu^{1/z} has no pole: which limit fails?

Solution

Solution of Exercise 17.6.

(a) The Laurent series ∑nz−n/n!\sum_nz^{-n}/n! has infinitely many negative terms: essential. Solving e1/z=w\eu^{1/z} = w (w≠0w \neq 0): 1z=log⁡∣w∣+iarg⁡w+2iπk\frac1z = \log\abs w + \iu\arg w + 2\iu\pi k, so

zk=1log⁡∣w∣+iarg⁡w+2iπk→k→∞0:z_k = \frac1{\log\abs w + \iu\arg w + 2\iu\pi k} \xrightarrow[k\to\infty]{} 0 :

every nonzero value is attained infinitely often near 00 — stronger than density. (b) Along z=1/xz = 1/x, x→+∞x \to +\infty: ex→∞\eu^x \to \infty; along z=i/yz = \iu/y: modulus 11. A pole requires ∣f(z)∣→∞\abs{f(z)} \to \infty along every approach: here the limit simply does not exist, even in [0,+∞][0, +\infty].

Exercise 17.7 ★★

Count with Rouché: (a) the zeros of z7−4z3+z−1z^7 - 4z^3 + z - 1 in ∣z∣<1\abs z < 1; (b) the zeros of z4+5z+1z^4 + 5z + 1 in ∣z∣<1\abs z < 1 and in 1<∣z∣<21 < \abs z < 2; (c) re-prove d’Alembert–Gauss: a monic degree-nn polynomial has nn zeros in some large disc (compare with znz^n).

Solution

Solution of Exercise 17.7.

(a) On ∣z∣=1\abs z = 1: ∣z7+z−1∣≤3<4=∣−4z3∣\abs{z^7 + z - 1} \leq 3 < 4 = \abs{-4z^3}. Rouché with f=−4z3f = -4z^3, g=z7+z−1g = z^7 + z - 1: three zeros in the disc. (b) On ∣z∣=1\abs z = 1: ∣z4+1∣≤2<5=∣5z∣\abs{z^4 + 1} \leq 2 < 5 = \abs{5z}: one zero in ∣z∣<1\abs z < 1. On ∣z∣=2\abs z = 2: ∣5z+1∣≤11<16=∣z4∣\abs{5z + 1} \leq 11 < 16 = \abs{z^4}: four zeros in ∣z∣<2\abs z < 2. Hence three zeros in the annulus. (c) For P=zn+an−1zn−1+…P = z^n + a_{n-1}z^{n-1} + \dots: on ∣z∣=R>1+∑∣ak∣\abs z = R > 1 + \sum\abs{a_k}, ∣P−zn∣≤(∑∣ak∣)Rn−1<Rn=∣zn∣\abs{P - z^n} \leq \bigl(\sum\abs{a_k}\bigr)R^{n-1} < R^n = \abs{z^n}: PP has exactly nn zeros in D(0,R)D(0, R) — d’Alembert–Gauss with multiplicity, by pure counting.

Exercise 17.8 ★★★

(Hurwitz) Let fn→ff_n \to f uniformly on compacts, fn∈H(Ω)f_n \in \mathcal H(\Omega), Ω\Omega connected, f≢0f \not\equiv 0. (a) Show that if all fnf_n are zero-free, so is ff. (If f(a)=0f(a) = 0: argument principle on a small circle around aa, and Theorem 16.15 to pass to the limit in ∫fn′/fn\int f_n'/f_n.) (b) Show that if all fnf_n are injective, ff is injective or constant. (Apply (a) to z↦fn(z)−fn(w)z \mapsto f_n(z) - f_n(w) on Ω∖{w}\Omega\setminus\{w\}.)

Solution

Solution of Exercise 17.8.

(a) Suppose f(a)=0f(a) = 0, f≢0f \not\equiv 0: choose rr with ff zero-free on the circle C=∂D(a,r)C = \partial D(a, r) (isolated zeros) and m=min⁡C∣f∣>0m = \min_C\abs f > 0. By Theorem 16.15, fn→ff_n \to f and fn′→f′f_n' \to f' uniformly on CC; for large nn, ∣fn∣≥m/2\abs{f_n} \geq m/2 on CC, so

12iπ∫Cfn′fn⟶12iπ∫Cf′f≥1\frac1{2\iu\pi}\int_C\frac{f_n'}{f_n} \longrightarrow \frac1{2\iu\pi}\int_C\frac{f'}{f} \geq 1

(the limit counts the zero aa; convergence because numerators converge uniformly and denominators are uniformly bounded below). The left side is an integer counting zeros of fnf_n in the disc: it must be ≥1\geq 1 eventually — contradicting zero-freeness. So ff is zero-free.

(b) Fix w∈Ωw \in \Omega and apply (a) on the connected open set Ω∖{w}\Omega\setminus\{w\} (removing a point of an open connected subset of C\C preserves connectedness) to gn(z)=fn(z)−fn(w)g_n(z) = f_n(z) - f_n(w), zero-free there by injectivity, converging to g=f−f(w)g = f - f(w). If ff is nonconstant, g≢0g \not\equiv 0 on Ω∖{w}\Omega\setminus\{w\}, so gg is zero-free there: f(z)≠f(w)f(z) \neq f(w) for all z≠wz \neq w. As ww was arbitrary, ff is injective.

Exercise 17.9 ★★★

For n≥2n \geq 2, integrate 11+zn\frac1{1 + z^n} over the boundary of the sector {0≤arg⁡z≤2πn, ∣z∣≤R}\{0 \leq \arg z \leq \frac{2\pi}n,\ \abs z \leq R\} and deduce

∫0+∞ ⁣dx1+xn=πn sin⁡(π/n).\int_0^{+\infty}\frac{\dd x}{1 + x^n} = \frac{\pi}{n\,\sin(\pi/n)} .

Verify n=2n = 2 against arctan⁡\arctan, and the limit n→∞n \to \infty.

Solution

Solution of Exercise 17.9.

The sector boundary consists of [0,R][0, R], the arc ARA_R, and the ray e2iπ/n[0,R]\eu^{2\iu\pi/n}[0, R] reversed. Inside lies the single pole p=eiπ/np = \eu^{\iu\pi/n} of 11+zn\frac1{1+z^n}, with residue 1npn−1=pnpn=−pn\frac1{np^{n-1}} = \frac{p}{np^n} = -\frac pn. On the return ray, z=e2iπ/nxz = \eu^{2\iu\pi/n}x gives zn=xnz^n = x^n and  ⁣dz=e2iπ/n ⁣dx\dd z = \eu^{2\iu\pi/n}\dd x; the arc is O(R−n)⋅O(R)→0O(R^{-n})\cdot O(R) \to 0. Hence

(1−e2iπ/n)∫0∞ ⁣dx1+xn=2iπ(−eiπ/nn),so∫0∞ ⁣dx1+xn=2iπn (eiπ/n−e−iπ/n)=πnsin⁡(π/n).\bigl(1 - \eu^{2\iu\pi/n}\bigr) \int_0^\infty\frac{\dd x}{1 + x^n} = 2\iu\pi\Bigl(-\frac{\eu^{\iu\pi/n}}n\Bigr), \quad\text{so}\quad \int_0^\infty\frac{\dd x}{1+x^n} = \frac{2\iu\pi}{n\,\bigl(\eu^{\iu\pi/n} - \eu^{-\iu\pi/n}\bigr)} = \frac{\pi}{n\sin(\pi/n)} .

n=2n = 2: π2sin⁡(π/2)=π2=[arctan⁡]0∞\frac\pi{2\sin(\pi/2)} = \frac\pi2 = [\arctan]_0^\infty. As n→∞n \to \infty: the value tends to 11, and indeed the integrand tends to 1[0, 1)\mathbf 1_{\intco01} (with DCT domination min⁡(1,x−2)\min(1, x^{-2}) for n≥2n \geq 2).

Exercise 17.10 ★★

Let ff be a rational function with deg⁡(denominator)≥deg⁡(numerator)+2\deg(\text{denominator}) \geq \deg(\text{numerator}) + 2. Show that the sum of all residues of ff is zero (integrate over larger and larger circles). Use this to recompute the partial fraction decomposition of 1z(z−1)(z−2)\frac1{z(z-1)(z-2)} with no linear algebra.

Solution

Solution of Exercise 17.10.

On ∣z∣=R\abs z = R large, ∣f∣≤CR−2\abs f \leq C R^{-2}: ∣∮CRf∣≤2πR⋅CR−2→0\abs{\oint_{C_R} f} \leq 2\pi R\cdot CR^{-2} \to 0. But for RR beyond all poles, the residue theorem gives ∮CRf=2iπ∑all pRes⁡(f,p)\oint_{C_R}f = 2\iu\pi\sum_{\text{all }p}\operatorname{Res}(f, p): the total sum vanishes. For f=1z(z−1)(z−2)f = \frac1{z(z-1)(z-2)}: residues 1(−1)(−2)=12\frac1{(-1)(-2)} = \frac12 at 00, 11⋅(−1)=−1\frac1{1\cdot(-1)} = -1 at 11, 12⋅1=12\frac1{2\cdot1} = \frac12 at 22 — summing to 00 as predicted, and

1z(z−1)(z−2)=1/2z−1z−1+1/2z−2:\frac1{z(z-1)(z-2)} = \frac{1/2}{z} - \frac1{z - 1} + \frac{1/2}{z-2} :

the residues are the partial fraction coefficients, and the zero-sum identity supplies a free consistency check (or determines the last coefficient from the others).

Exercise 17.11 ★★★

(The keyhole: Euler’s reflection integral) For 0<a<10 < a < 1, compute

I(a)=∫0∞xa−11+x  ⁣dx=πsin⁡(πa)I(a) = \int_0^{\infty}\frac{x^{a-1}}{1 + x}\,\dd x = \frac{\pi}{\sin(\pi a)}

by integrating f(z)=za−11+z=e(a−1)log⁡z1+zf(z) = \frac{z^{a-1}}{1+z} = \frac{\eu^{(a-1)\log z}}{1 + z} (logarithm cut along R+\R_+, arg⁡z∈(0, 2π)\arg z \in \intoo0{2\pi}) over the keyhole contour: out along the top of the cut from ε\varepsilon to RR, around CRC_R, back under the cut, around CεC_\varepsilon. Justify: the two straight stretches differ by the factor e2iπ(a−1)\eu^{2\iu\pi(a-1)}, the circle contributions vanish (Ra−1⋅R→0R^{a-1}\cdot R \to 0 and εa−1⋅ε→0\varepsilon^{a-1}\cdot\varepsilon \to 0), and the unique pole z=−1z = -1 has residue eiπ(a−1)\eu^{\iu\pi(a - 1)}. Deduce also Γ(a)Γ(1−a)=πsin⁡πa\Gamma(a)\Gamma(1 - a) = \frac\pi{\sin\pi a} (write Γ(a)Γ(1−a)=B(a,1−a)\Gamma(a)\Gamma(1-a) = B(a, 1-a) by Problem 10.1 and substitute t=x1+xt = \frac{x}{1+x}).

Solution

Solution of Exercise 17.11.

On the keyhole, with the chosen determination: just above the cut, log⁡z=ln⁡x\log z = \ln x; just below, log⁡z=ln⁡x+2iπ\log z = \ln x + 2\iu\pi. The four pieces give

(1−e2iπ(a−1))∫εRxa−11+x ⁣dx+∫CR+∫Cε=2iπRes⁡(f,−1).\Bigl(1 - \eu^{2\iu\pi(a-1)}\Bigr)\int_\varepsilon^R \frac{x^{a-1}}{1+x}\dd x + \int_{C_R} + \int_{C_\varepsilon} = 2\iu\pi\operatorname{Res}(f, -1) .

Arcs: ∣f∣≤Ra−1R−1\abs{f} \leq \frac{R^{a-1}}{R - 1} on CRC_R, length 2πR2\pi R: contribution O(Ra−1)→0O(R^{a-1}) \to 0 (a<1a < 1); ∣f∣≤εa−11−ε\abs f \leq \frac{\varepsilon^{a-1}}{1 - \varepsilon} on CεC_\varepsilon, length 2πε2\pi\varepsilon: O(εa)→0O(\varepsilon^a) \to 0 (a>0a > 0). Residue: at z=−1=eiπz = -1 = \eu^{\iu\pi}, Res⁡=e(a−1)iπ\operatorname{Res} = \eu^{(a-1)\iu\pi}. Hence

I(a)=2iπ eiπ(a−1)1−e2iπ(a−1)=2iπe−iπ(a−1)−eiπ(a−1)=π−sin⁡(π(a−1))=πsin⁡πa.I(a) = \frac{2\iu\pi\,\eu^{\iu\pi(a-1)}}{1 - \eu^{2\iu\pi(a-1)}} = \frac{2\iu\pi}{\eu^{-\iu\pi(a-1)} - \eu^{\iu\pi(a-1)}} = \frac{\pi}{-\sin(\pi(a-1))} = \frac{\pi}{\sin\pi a} .

Gamma reflection: B(a,1−a)=∫01ta−1(1−t)−a ⁣dtB(a, 1-a) = \int_0^1t^{a-1}(1-t)^{-a}\dd t; the substitution t=x1+xt = \frac x{1+x}, 1−t=11+x1 - t = \frac1{1+x},  ⁣dt= ⁣dx(1+x)2\dd t = \frac{\dd x}{(1+x)^2} turns it into ∫0∞xa−11+x ⁣dx=I(a)\int_0^\infty \frac{x^{a-1}}{1+x}\dd x = I(a), and Euler’s formula B(a,1−a)=Γ(a)Γ(1−a)/Γ(1)B(a, 1-a) = \Gamma(a)\Gamma(1-a)/\Gamma(1) (Problem 10.1) gives Γ(a)Γ(1−a)=πsin⁡πa\Gamma(a)\Gamma(1-a) = \frac\pi{\sin\pi a} — in particular Γ(12)=π\Gamma(\tfrac12) = \sqrt\pi once more.

Exercise 17.12 ★★

(Counting zeros with the argument principle, numerically) Let P(z)=z4+8z+1P(z) = z^4 + 8z + 1. (a) How many zeros in the unit disc? (Rouché against 8z+18z + 1.) (b) How many in the annulus 1<∣z∣<31 < \abs z < 3? (Rouché against z4z^4 on ∣z∣=3\abs z = 3.) Sharpen: show every zero has modulus <2.1< 2.1. (c) How many in the right half-plane? (Count on ∣z∣=2\abs z = 2 first; then track the image of the imaginary axis: P(it)=t4+1+8itP(\iu t) = t^4 + 1 + 8\iu t has positive real part throughout, so no zeros on the axis, and the argument variation along it is computable — conclude with a large half-disc.)

Solution

Solution of Exercise 17.12.

(a) On ∣z∣=1\abs z = 1: ∣z4∣=1<7≤∣8z+1∣\abs{z^4} = 1 < 7 \leq \abs{8z + 1} (∣8z∣−1=7\abs{8z} - 1 = 7): PP has as many zeros in D\mathbb D as 8z+18z + 1, namely one (at −18-\frac18).

(b) On ∣z∣=3\abs z = 3: ∣8z+1∣≤25<81=∣z4∣\abs{8z + 1} \leq 25 < 81 = \abs{z^4}: Rouché against z4z^4 gives all four zeros in ∣z∣<3\abs z < 3, hence 4−1=34 - 1 = 3 zeros in the annulus 1<∣z∣<31 < \abs z < 3. Sharpening: a zero with ∣z∣=r≥2.1\abs z = r \geq 2.1 would satisfy r4=∣8z+1∣≤8r+1r^4 = \abs{8z + 1} \leq 8r + 1, but r4−8r−1r^4 - 8r - 1 is increasing for r≥2r \geq 2 and equals 19.45−16.8−1=1.65>019.45 - 16.8 - 1 = 1.65 > 0 at r=2.1r = 2.1: impossible. So the three outer zeros lie in 1<∣z∣<2.11 < \abs z < 2.1. (Numerically: a real zero near −1.95-1.95 and a conjugate pair near 1.04±1.73i1.04 \pm 1.73\iu, of modulus 2.022.02 — which is why a Rouché attempt at radius exactly 22 must fail: the theorem demands strict domination, and the zeros sit just outside.)

(c) No zeros on iR\iu\R: Re⁡P(it)=t4+1≥1\operatorname{Re}P(\iu t) = t^4 + 1 \geq 1. Zeros in the right half-plane: use the argument principle on the boundary of the half-disc {∣z∣≤R, Re⁡z≥0}\{\abs z \leq R,\ \operatorname{Re}z \geq 0\}. On the large arc, arg⁡P≈arg⁡z4\arg P \approx \arg z^4 turns by 4⋅π=2π⋅24\cdot\pi = 2\pi\cdot2 (the arc spans angle π\pi). Along the imaginary axis from iR\iu R down to −iR-\iu R: P(it)=(t4+1)+8itP(\iu t) = (t^4 + 1) + 8\iu t stays in the right half-plane (Re⁡>0\operatorname{Re} > 0), so arg⁡P\arg P varies within (−π/2, π/2)\intoo{-\pi/2}{\pi/2} and returns with net change →0\to 0 as R→∞R \to \infty (endpoints both ≈arg⁡t4=0\approx \arg t^4 = 0). Total winding: 4π+02π=2\frac{4\pi + 0} {2\pi} = 2: two zeros in the right half-plane — consistent with the numerics: the conjugate pair ≈1.04±1.73i\approx 1.04 \pm 1.73\iu has positive real part, the real zeros ≈−0.125\approx -0.125 and ≈−1.96\approx -1.96 negative.

17.6 Problem: ζ(2k)\zeta(2k) by the cotangent

Problem 17.1

Weekend problem — summing ∑n−2k\sum n^{-2k} with residues

The residue theorem sums series: pairing a rational function with πcot⁡(πz)\pi\cot(\pi z), whose poles sit at the integers, turns ∑nf(n)\sum_{n}f(n) into a residue count. We prove the method and compute ζ(2)=π26\zeta(2) = \frac{\pi^2}{6} and ζ(4)=π490\zeta(4) = \frac{\pi^4}{90} — the values found by Fourier series in Year 2 and by operator traces in Chapter 15, now by contour integration.

Part I — The cotangent kernel.

  1. Show that πcot⁡(πz)\pi\cot(\pi z) is meromorphic on C\C with simple poles exactly at z=n∈Zz = n \in \Z, each of residue 11 (compute lim⁡z→n(z−n)πcot⁡πz\lim_{z\to n}(z-n)\pi\cot\pi z).
  2. Compute the beginning of the Laurent expansion at 00:

    πcot⁡(πz)=1z−π23 z−π445 z3+O(z5),\pi\cot(\pi z) = \frac1z - \frac{\pi^2}{3}\,z - \frac{\pi^4}{45}\,z^3 + O(z^5) ,

    by dividing the power series of cos⁡\cos by that of sin⁡\sin (justify the division: sin⁡πzπz\frac{\sin\pi z}{\pi z} is holomorphic and nonzero near 00, so its reciprocal is holomorphic; identify coefficients through order 33).

  3. Let CNC_N be the boundary of the square with vertices (±1±i)(N+12)(\pm1\pm\iu)(N + \frac12). Show that ∣cot⁡(πz)∣≤2\abs{\cot(\pi z)} \leq 2 on CNC_N for every N≥1N \geq 1. (On vertical sides, cot⁡(π(±(N+12)+iy))=∓tan⁡(iπy)\cot(\pi(\pm(N + \frac12) + \iu y)) = \mp\tan(\iu\pi y), of modulus ∣tanh⁡(πy)∣≤1\abs{\tanh(\pi y)} \leq 1; on horizontal sides ∣y∣=N+12\abs y = N + \frac12, bound ∣cot⁡(π(x±iy))∣≤coth⁡(πy)≤coth⁡(π/2)<1.1\abs{\cot(\pi(x\pm\iu y))} \leq \coth(\pi y) \leq \coth(\pi/2) < 1.1.)

Part II — The summation theorem.

  1. Let ff be rational, holomorphic at the integers, with deg⁡(denom)≥deg⁡(num)+2\deg(\text{denom}) \geq \deg(\text{num}) + 2. Using the residue theorem on CNC_N and the bound of question 3, prove:

    lim⁡N→∞ ∑n=−NNf(n)=−∑p pole of fRes⁡(πcot⁡(πz)f(z), p).\lim_{N\to\infty}\ \sum_{n = -N}^{N} f(n) = -\sum_{p\ \text{pole of}\ f} \operatorname{Res}\bigl(\pi\cot(\pi z)f(z),\,p\bigr).
  2. Where does the argument need the degree condition? Show by example (take f(z)=1/(z+12)f(z) = 1/(z + \frac12)) that for slower decay the symmetric limit may still exist while the two-sided series diverges — and that the formula then computes the principal value.

Part III — The values.

  1. Apply the method to f(z)=1/z2f(z) = 1/z^2: here ff has its pole at an integer, so run the argument directly — integrate g(z)=πcot⁡(πz)z2g(z) = \frac{\pi\cot(\pi z)}{z^2} over CNC_N, show the integral →0\to 0, and compute Res⁡(g,0)\operatorname{Res}(g, 0) from question 2. Conclude:

    2∑n≥11n2=π23,ζ(2)=π26.2\sum_{n\geq1}\frac1{n^2} = \frac{\pi^2}{3}, \qquad \zeta(2) = \frac{\pi^2}6 .
  2. Same with g(z)=πcot⁡(πz)z4g(z) = \frac{\pi\cot(\pi z)}{z^4}: compute Res⁡(g,0)\operatorname{Res}(g, 0) and deduce ζ(4)=π490\zeta(4) = \frac{\pi^4}{90}.
  3. Explain the general pattern: for every k≥1k \geq 1, ζ(2k)\zeta(2k) is −12-\frac12 times the coefficient of z2k−1z^{2k-1} in the Laurent expansion of πcot⁡(πz)\pi\cot(\pi z) at 00 — a rational multiple of π2k\pi^{2k}. Compute ζ(6)\zeta(6) by pushing question 2’s division one step further. What does the method say about ζ(3)\zeta(3) — and why does it say nothing?

Part IV — The partial fraction expansion of the cotangent.

  1. Fix w∈C∖Zw \in \C\setminus\Z and apply the method of Part II to f(z)=1(z−w)(z+w)f(z) = \dfrac{1}{(z - w)(z + w)} — noting that πcot⁡(πz)f(z)\pi\cot(\pi z)f(z) now has additional simple poles at ±w\pm w, whose residues must join the count. Deduce the partial fraction expansion

    πcot⁡(πw)=1w+∑n≥12ww2−n2,\pi\cot(\pi w) = \frac1w + \sum_{n\geq1}\frac{2w}{w^2 - n^2},

    the series converging normally on compact subsets of C∖Z\C\setminus\Z.

  2. Recover from this expansion, by expanding each term in powers of ww (justify the interchange), the same Laurent coefficients as in question 2 — the circle closes: Euler’s formula ∑1n2=π26\sum\frac1{n^2} = \frac{\pi^2}6 is the coefficient of ww in the cotangent’s two faces. Compare with the Fourier-series proof (Year 2) and the trace proof (Problem 15.1): three theories, one number.

Part V — Euler’s product for the sine. The expansion of question 9 is the logarithmic derivative of an infinite product; we now prove Euler’s 1734 factorization honestly.

  1. For N≥1N \geq 1 set PN(z)=z∏n=1N(1−z2n2)P_N(z) = z\prod_{n=1}^{N}\bigl(1 - \frac{z^2}{n^2}\bigr). Show that PNP_N converges, uniformly on every disc Dˉ(0,R)\bar D(0, R), to an entire function PP whose zeros are exactly the integers, all simple. (For n≥2Rn \geq 2R write the factor as exp⁡log⁡(1−z2/n2)\exp\log(1 - z^2/n^2) with the principal logarithm of Exercise 16.3, bound ∣log⁡(1+u)∣≤2∣u∣\abs{\log(1+u)} \leq 2\abs u for ∣u∣≤12\abs u \leq \frac12 via the series, and exponentiate the normally convergent sum of logarithms; the finitely many remaining factors are a polynomial. Conclude with Theorem 16.15.)
  2. Show that on C∖Z\C\setminus\Z,

    P′(z)P(z)=1z+∑n≥12zz2−n2=πcot⁡(πz)\frac{P'(z)}{P(z)} = \frac1z + \sum_{n\geq1}\frac{2z}{z^2 - n^2} = \pi\cot(\pi z)

    (differentiate the finite products, pass to the limit using Theorem 16.15 and the zero-freeness of PP off Z\Z, and quote question 9).

  3. Show that Q=sin⁡(πz)/P(z)Q = \sin(\pi z)/P(z) extends to a zero-free entire function with Q′=0Q' = 0, and conclude Euler’s product:

    sin⁡(πz)=πz∏n≥1(1−z2n2)(z∈C).\sin(\pi z) = \pi z\prod_{n\geq1} \Bigl(1 - \frac{z^2}{n^2}\Bigr) \qquad (z \in \C) .
  4. (Wallis, 1655) Evaluate at z=12z = \frac12:

    π2=∏n≥14n24n2−1=lim⁡N→∞2⋅2⋅4⋅4⋯(2N)(2N)1⋅3⋅3⋅5⋯(2N−1)(2N+1).\frac\pi2 = \prod_{n\geq1}\frac{4n^2}{4n^2 - 1} = \lim_{N\to\infty} \frac{2\cdot2\cdot4\cdot4\cdots(2N)(2N)} {1\cdot3\cdot3\cdot5\cdots(2N-1)(2N+1)} .
  5. For ∣z∣<1\abs z < 1, expand the logarithm of the product as a double series (justify the rearrangement) and recover ζ(2)=π26\zeta(2) = \frac{\pi^2}6 by matching the coefficient of z3z^3 in sin⁡(πz)=πz−π36z3+⋯\sin(\pi z) = \pi z - \frac{\pi^3}6z^3 + \cdots — the product’s face of Euler’s number.

Part VI — Sister kernels. The cotangent has siblings; each prices its own family of series.

  1. Differentiate question 9’s expansion term by term (justified by Theorem 16.15) to obtain, normally on compacts of C∖Z\C\setminus\Z,

    π2sin⁡2(πz)=∑n∈Z1(z−n)2.\frac{\pi^2}{\sin^2(\pi z)} = \sum_{n\in\Z}\frac1{(z - n)^2} .
  2. Evaluate at z=12z = \frac12: ∑m≥01(2m+1)2=π28\sum_{m\geq0}\frac1{(2m+1)^2} = \frac{\pi^2}8; recover ζ(2)\zeta(2) once more by splitting the integers by parity.
  3. Verify the duplication identity tan⁡θ=cot⁡θ−2cot⁡(2θ)\tan\theta = \cot\theta - 2\cot(2\theta) and deduce

    πtan⁡(πz)=∑m≥08z(2m+1)2−4z2,\pi\tan(\pi z) = \sum_{m\geq0}\frac{8z}{(2m+1)^2 - 4z^2} ,

    normally on compacts avoiding 12+Z\frac12 + \Z.

  4. Expand around 00 (∣z∣<12\abs z < \frac12; Fubini again): with λ(s)=∑m≥0(2m+1)−s\lambda(s) = \sum_{m\geq0}(2m+1)^{-s},

    πtan⁡(πz)=∑k≥08⋅4k λ(2k+2) z2k+1;\pi\tan(\pi z) = \sum_{k\geq0}8\cdot4^k\,\lambda(2k+2)\,z^{2k+1} ;

    compare with tan⁡u=u+u33+O(u5)\tan u = u + \frac{u^3}3 + O(u^5) to recover λ(2)=π28\lambda(2) = \frac{\pi^2}8 and to get λ(4)=π496\lambda(4) = \frac{\pi^4}{96}, then cross-check ζ(4)=π490\zeta(4) = \frac{\pi^4}{90} via λ(4)=(1−2−4) ζ(4)\lambda(4) = (1 - 2^{-4})\,\zeta(4).

  5. Verify 1sin⁡θ=cot⁡θ2−cot⁡θ\frac1{\sin\theta} = \cot\frac\theta2 - \cot\theta and deduce

    πsin⁡(πz)=1z+∑n≥1(−1)n 2zz2−n2.\frac{\pi}{\sin(\pi z)} = \frac1z + \sum_{n\geq1}(-1)^n\,\frac{2z}{z^2 - n^2} .

    Check the signs against the residues of π/sin⁡(πz)\pi/\sin(\pi z) at the integers.

  6. Read off the coefficient of zz: η(2)=∑n≥1(−1)n−1n2=π212\eta(2) = \sum_{n\geq1}\frac{(-1)^{n-1}}{n^2} = \frac{\pi^2}{12}, and confirm the consistency η(2)=(1−21−2) ζ(2)\eta(2) = (1 - 2^{1-2})\,\zeta(2).
  7. (Finale) Evaluate question 20’s expansion at z=12z = \frac12 and deduce Leibniz’s formula

    π4=1−13+15−17+⋯\frac\pi4 = 1 - \frac13 + \frac15 - \frac17 + \cdots

    Close with a short paragraph: one kernel per arithmetic — which kernel prices which family of series, and why all of them are structurally blind to ζ(3)\zeta(3).

Part VII — The full price list: Bernoulli numbers.

  1. Combine the partial fraction expansion of πzcot⁡(πz)\pi z\cot(\pi z) with the generating function of the Bernoulli numbers (wew−1=∑nBnn!wn\frac{w}{\eu^w - 1} = \sum_n\frac{B_n}{n!}w^n, Problem 16.1, Part VI): from

    πzcot⁡(πz)=iπz+2iπze2iπz−1\pi z\cot(\pi z) = \iu\pi z + \frac{2\iu\pi z}{\eu^{2\iu\pi z} - 1}

    (prove this identity first), deduce the closed form

    ζ(2k)=(−1)k+1 (2π)2k B2k2 (2k)!(k≥1).\zeta(2k) = (-1)^{k+1}\, \frac{(2\pi)^{2k}\,B_{2k}}{2\,(2k)!} \qquad (k \geq 1).
  2. Verify the formula against B2=16B_2 = \frac16, B4=−130B_4 = -\frac1{30}, B6=142B_6 = \frac1{42}: recover ζ(2)=π26\zeta(2) = \frac{\pi^2}6, ζ(4)=π490\zeta(4) = \frac{\pi^4}{90}, and compute ζ(6)=π6945\zeta(6) = \frac{\pi^6}{945}.
  3. (Euler’s recursion) Expand both sides of (zcot⁡z)′=cot⁡z−z(1+cot⁡2z)\bigl(z\cot z\bigr)' = \cot z - z(1 + \cot^2z) — or square the cotangent series directly — to prove

    (k+12)ζ(2k)=∑j=1k−1ζ(2j) ζ(2k−2j)(k≥2),\Bigl(k + \frac12\Bigr)\zeta(2k) = \sum_{j=1}^{k-1}\zeta(2j)\,\zeta(2k - 2j) \qquad (k \geq 2),

    and check it computes ζ(4)\zeta(4) from ζ(2)\zeta(2) and ζ(6)\zeta(6) from ζ(2),ζ(4)\zeta(2), \zeta(4) — all even zeta values from the single seed π26\frac{\pi^2}6, with no new integration.

Solution

Solution of Problem 17.1.

1. sin⁡(πz)\sin(\pi z) has simple zeros exactly at Z\Z (sin⁡πz=0\sin\pi z = 0 iff z∈Zz \in \Z, and (sin⁡πz)′=πcos⁡πz≠0(\sin\pi z)' = \pi\cos\pi z \neq 0 there), and cos⁡(πn)≠0\cos(\pi n) \neq 0: πcot⁡(πz)=πcos⁡(πz)/sin⁡(πz)\pi\cot(\pi z) = \pi\cos(\pi z)/\sin(\pi z) has simple poles at Z\Z with

Res⁡(πcot⁡πz, n)=πcos⁡(πn)πcos⁡(πn)=1\operatorname{Res}(\pi\cot\pi z,\ n) = \frac{\pi\cos(\pi n)}{\pi\cos(\pi n)} = 1

(g/h′g/h' rule, Method 17.6).

2. sin⁡(πz)πz=1−(πz)26+(πz)4120−⋯\frac{\sin(\pi z)}{\pi z} = 1 - \frac{(\pi z)^2}6 + \frac{(\pi z)^4}{120} - \cdots is holomorphic and nonzero near 00: its reciprocal is holomorphic (Definition 16.1: quotient), with series 1+(πz)26+7(πz)4360+⋯1 + \frac{(\pi z)^2}{6} + \frac{7(\pi z)^4}{360} + \cdots (identify: (1−u)−1(1 - u)^{-1}-style coefficients from u=(πz)26−(πz)4120u = \frac{(\pi z)^2}6 - \frac{(\pi z)^4}{120}: the z4z^4 coefficient is 136−1120=7360\frac1{36} - \frac1{120} = \frac{7}{360}). Multiply by cos⁡(πz)=1−(πz)22+(πz)424−⋯\cos(\pi z) = 1 - \frac{(\pi z)^2}2 + \frac{(\pi z)^4}{24} - \cdots and divide by zz:

πcot⁡(πz)=1z[1+π2z2(16−12)+π4z4(7360−112+124)]+⋯=1z−π23 z−π445 z3−⋯\pi\cot(\pi z) = \frac1z\Bigl[1 + \pi^2z^2\Bigl(\frac16 - \frac12\Bigr) + \pi^4z^4\Bigl(\frac7{360} - \frac1{12} + \frac1{24}\Bigr)\Bigr] + \cdots = \frac1z - \frac{\pi^2}3\,z - \frac{\pi^4}{45}\,z^3 - \cdots

(7360−30360+15360=−8360=−145\frac7{360} - \frac{30}{360} + \frac{15}{360} = -\frac8{360} = -\frac1{45}).

3. Vertical sides z=±(N+12)+iyz = \pm(N + \frac12) + \iu y: by π\pi-periodicity of cot⁡\cot, cot⁡(πz)=cot⁡(±π2+iπy)=−tan⁡(iπy)=−itanh⁡(πy)\cot(\pi z) = \cot(\pm\frac\pi2 + \iu\pi y) = -\tan(\iu\pi y) = -\iu\tanh(\pi y), of modulus ≤1\leq 1. Horizontal sides z=x±i(N+12)z = x \pm \iu(N + \frac12): from ∣cot⁡(a+ib)∣2=cos⁡2a+sinh⁡2bsin⁡2a+sinh⁡2b≤1+sinh⁡2bsinh⁡2b=coth⁡2b\abs{\cot(a + \iu b)}^2 = \frac{\cos^2a + \sinh^2b}{\sin^2a + \sinh^2b} \leq \frac{1 + \sinh^2b}{\sinh^2b} = \coth^2 b,

∣cot⁡(πz)∣≤coth⁡(π(N+12))≤coth⁡(π/2)<1.1.\abs{\cot(\pi z)} \leq \coth\bigl(\pi(N + \tfrac12)\bigr) \leq \coth(\pi/2) < 1.1 .

Both bounds are ≤2\leq 2.

4. Apply Theorem 17.5 to F(z)=πcot⁡(πz)f(z)F(z) = \pi\cot(\pi z)f(z) on CNC_N (NN beyond all poles of ff):

12iπ∮CNF=∑n=−NNf(n)+∑pRes⁡(F,p),\frac1{2\iu\pi}\oint_{C_N}F = \sum_{n=-N}^{N}f(n) + \sum_p\operatorname{Res}(F, p),

the integer poles contributing f(n)f(n) (question 1; ff holomorphic there). On CNC_N: ∣F∣≤2π⋅C∣z∣−2≤2πCN−2\abs F \leq 2\pi\cdot C\abs z^{-2} \leq 2\pi C N^{-2}, and the perimeter is 8(N+12)8(N + \frac12): the integral is O(1/N)→0O(1/N) \to 0. Let N→∞N \to \infty: the displayed summation formula.

5. The decay ∣f∣=O(∣z∣−2)\abs f = O(\abs z^{-2}) killed the contour integral and made ∑∣f(n)∣\sum\abs{f(n)} converge. For f(z)=1z+12f(z) = \frac1{z + \frac12}: the symmetric sums ∑−NN1n+12\sum_{-N}^N\frac1{n + \frac12} telescope to 00 (the terms nn and −n−1-n - 1 cancel), and the right side is −Res⁡(πcot⁡πzz+12,−12)=−πcot⁡(−π2)=0-\operatorname{Res}\bigl(\frac{\pi\cot\pi z}{z + \frac12}, -\frac12\bigr) = -\pi\cot(-\frac\pi2) = 0: consistent — but ∑∣f(n)∣\sum\abs{f(n)} diverges; the method computes the symmetric (principal value) limit only.

6. g(z)=πcot⁡(πz)z2g(z) = \frac{\pi\cot(\pi z)}{z^2}: poles at the nonzero integers with residues 1n2\frac1{n^2}, and at 00 where, by question 2,

g(z)=1z3−π23z−π445z−⋯:Res⁡(g,0)=−π23.g(z) = \frac1{z^3} - \frac{\pi^2}{3z} - \frac{\pi^4}{45}z - \cdots : \qquad \operatorname{Res}(g, 0) = -\frac{\pi^2}3 .

The contour integral over CNC_N tends to 00 as in question 4 (∣g∣=O(N−2)\abs{g} = O(N^{-2}) on CNC_N). Hence 0=∑n≠01n2−π230 = \sum_{n\neq0}\frac1{n^2} - \frac{\pi^2}3: 2ζ(2)=π232\zeta(2) = \frac{\pi^2}3, ζ(2)=π26\zeta(2) = \frac{\pi^2}6.

7. g(z)=πcot⁡(πz)z4=1z5−π23z3−π445z−⋯g(z) = \frac{\pi\cot(\pi z)}{z^4} = \frac1{z^5} - \frac{\pi^2}{3z^3} - \frac{\pi^4}{45z} - \cdots: residue at 00 equal to −π445-\frac{\pi^4}{45}, and 0=2ζ(4)−π4450 = 2\zeta(4) - \frac{\pi^4}{45}: ζ(4)=π490\zeta(4) = \frac{\pi^4}{90}.

8. With g=πcot⁡(πz)/z2kg = \pi\cot(\pi z)/z^{2k}: the residue at 00 is the coefficient a2k−1a_{2k-1} of z2k−1z^{2k-1} in the expansion of πcot⁡(πz)\pi\cot(\pi z), and the vanishing contour gives 2ζ(2k)+a2k−1=02\zeta(2k) + a_{2k-1} = 0: ζ(2k)=−a2k−1/2\zeta(2k) = -a_{2k-1}/2, a rational multiple of π2k\pi^{2k} since the cotangent’s coefficients are. One more division step yields a5=−2π6945a_5 = -\frac{2\pi^6}{945}, whence ζ(6)=π6945\zeta(6) = \frac{\pi^6}{945}. For ζ(3)\zeta(3): the natural kernel g=πcot⁡(πz)/z3g = \pi\cot(\pi z)/z^3 produces ∑n≠01n3=0\sum_{n\neq0}\frac1{n^3} = 0 by oddness — the method proves 0=00 = 0 and is structurally blind to odd zeta values (no closed form for ζ(3)\zeta(3) is known; its irrationality, Apéry 1978, needed entirely different ideas).

9. F(z)=πcot⁡(πz)(z−w)(z+w)F(z) = \frac{\pi\cot(\pi z)}{(z - w)(z + w)} has poles at the integers (residues 1n2−w2\frac1{n^2 - w^2}, noting the sign: f(n)=1(n−w)(n+w)=1n2−w2f(n) = \frac1{(n-w)(n+w)} = \frac1{n^2 - w^2}) and simple poles at ±w\pm w with residues πcot⁡(±πw)±2w=πcot⁡(πw)2w\frac{\pi\cot(\pm\pi w)}{\pm2w} = \frac{\pi\cot(\pi w)}{2w} each (cot⁡\cot is odd). Question 4’s argument (∣f∣=O(∣z∣−2)\abs f = O(\abs z^{-2})) gives

∑n∈Z1n2−w2+πcot⁡(πw)w=0,i.e.πcot⁡(πw)=1w+∑n≥12ww2−n2,\sum_{n\in\Z}\frac1{n^2 - w^2} + \frac{\pi\cot(\pi w)}{w} = 0, \qquad\text{i.e.}\qquad \pi\cot(\pi w) = \frac1w + \sum_{n\geq1}\frac{2w}{w^2 - n^2},

(the n=0n = 0 term is −1w2-\frac1{w^2}; regroup ±n\pm n). Normal convergence on compacts of C∖Z\C\setminus\Z: for ∣w∣≤R\abs w \leq R and n≥2Rn \geq 2R, ∣2ww2−n2∣≤2Rn2−R2≤8R3n2\abs{\frac{2w}{w^2 - n^2}} \leq \frac{2R}{n^2 - R^2} \leq \frac{8R}{3n^2}.

10. For ∣w∣≤r<1\abs w \leq r < 1: 2ww2−n2=−2wn2⋅11−w2/n2=−2∑k≥0w2k+1n2k+2\frac{2w}{w^2 - n^2} = -\frac{2w}{n^2}\cdot\frac1{1 - w^2/n^2} = -2\sum_{k\geq0}\frac{w^{2k+1}}{n^{2k+2}}, with ∣terms∣≤2r2k+1/n2k+2\abs{\text{terms}} \leq 2r^{2k+1}/n^{2k+2}, summable over (n,k)(n, k): Fubini for series rearranges

πcot⁡(πw)=1w−2∑k≥0ζ(2k+2) w2k+1.\pi\cot(\pi w) = \frac1w - 2\sum_{k\geq0}\zeta(2k+2)\,w^{2k+1} .

Matching with question 2: −2ζ(2)=−π23-2\zeta(2) = -\frac{\pi^2}3 and −2ζ(4)=−π445-2\zeta(4) = -\frac{\pi^4}{45} — the same values. Three roads to π26\frac{\pi^2}6: Parseval (Fourier series), the trace of the string’s Green operator, and the cotangent’s two expansions; that a sum over frequencies, an operator trace, and a contour integral agree is no accident — each is a face of the same spectral identity.

11. Fix R≥1R \geq 1 and let n0n_0 be the smallest integer ≥2R\geq 2R. For ∣z∣≤R\abs z \leq R and n≥n0n \geq n_0: ∣z2/n2∣≤14\abs{z^2/n^2} \leq \frac14, so 1−z2/n2∈Dˉ(1,14)1 - z^2/n^2 \in \bar D(1, \frac14), where the principal logarithm is holomorphic, and

∣log⁡(1−z2n2)∣≤∑k≥11k ∣z2n2∣k≤∣z2/n2∣1−∣z2/n2∣≤2R2n2:\Bigl|\log\Bigl(1 - \frac{z^2}{n^2}\Bigr)\Bigr| \leq \sum_{k\geq1}\frac1k\,\Bigl|\frac{z^2}{n^2}\Bigr|^k \leq \frac{\abs{z^2/n^2}}{1 - \abs{z^2/n^2}} \leq \frac{2R^2}{n^2} :

the sum S(z)=∑n≥n0log⁡(1−z2/n2)S(z) = \sum_{n\geq n_0}\log(1 - z^2/n^2) converges normally on Dˉ(0,R)\bar D(0, R), with holomorphic partial sums SNS_N and ∣SN∣≤2R2ζ(2)\abs{S_N} \leq 2R^2\zeta(2) uniformly. Since ∣ea−eb∣≤emax⁡(∣a∣,∣b∣)∣a−b∣\abs{\eu^a - \eu^b} \leq \eu^{\max(\abs a,\abs b)}\abs{a - b} (mean value bound on the segment), the tail products ∏n0≤n≤N=eSN\prod_{n_0\leq n\leq N} = \eu^{S_N} converge uniformly on Dˉ(0,R)\bar D(0, R) to the zero-free eS\eu^S. Multiplying by the fixed polynomial z∏n<n0(1−z2/n2)z\prod_{n<n_0}(1 - z^2/n^2): PN→PP_N \to P uniformly on Dˉ(0,R)\bar D(0, R), and Theorem 16.15 makes PP holomorphic there; RR being arbitrary, PP is entire. On Dˉ(0,R)\bar D(0, R) the zeros of PP are those of the polynomial prefactor — the integers of modulus ≤R\leq R, each simple ((1−z/n)(1+z/n)(1 - z/n)(1 + z/n) has distinct simple zeros, eS\eu^S none): the zero set of PP is Z\Z, all zeros simple.

12. Logarithmic differentiation of the finite product, away from its zeros:

PN′(z)PN(z)=1z+∑n=1N−2z/n21−z2/n2=1z+∑n=1N2zz2−n2.\frac{P_N'(z)}{P_N(z)} = \frac1z + \sum_{n=1}^{N}\frac{-2z/n^2}{1 - z^2/n^2} = \frac1z + \sum_{n=1}^{N}\frac{2z}{z^2 - n^2} .

On a compact K⊆C∖ZK \subseteq \C\setminus\Z: PN→PP_N \to P and PN′→P′P_N' \to P' uniformly (Theorem 16.15), and min⁡K∣P∣>0\min_K \abs P > 0 (PP vanishes only on Z\Z), so eventually ∣PN∣≥12min⁡K∣P∣\abs{P_N} \geq \frac12\min_K\abs P and PN′/PN→P′/PP_N'/P_N \to P'/P uniformly on KK. The middle member converges to 1z+∑n≥12zz2−n2=πcot⁡(πz)\frac1z + \sum_{n\geq1}\frac{2z}{z^2-n^2} = \pi\cot(\pi z) by question 9: hence P′/P=πcot⁡(πz)P'/P = \pi\cot(\pi z) on C∖Z\C\setminus\Z.

13. sin⁡(πz)\sin(\pi z) and PP are entire with the same zero set Z\Z, all zeros simple (questions 1 and 11). Near m∈Zm \in \Z write sin⁡(πz)=(z−m) σ(z)\sin(\pi z) = (z - m)\,\sigma(z) and P(z)=(z−m) ψ(z)P(z) = (z - m)\,\psi(z) with σ,ψ\sigma, \psi holomorphic and nonvanishing at mm (factor the power series): Q=sin⁡(πz)/P=σ/ψQ = \sin(\pi z)/P = \sigma/\psi extends holomorphically and zero-free across each integer, and is zero-free on C∖Z\C\setminus\Z as a quotient of zero-free functions. There,

Q′Q=(sin⁡πz)′sin⁡πz−P′P=πcot⁡(πz)−πcot⁡(πz)=0,\frac{Q'}{Q} = \frac{(\sin\pi z)'}{\sin\pi z} - \frac{P'}{P} = \pi\cot(\pi z) - \pi\cot(\pi z) = 0 ,

so the entire function Q′Q' vanishes on C∖Z\C\setminus\Z, hence everywhere by continuity: QQ is constant. As z→0z \to 0: sin⁡(πz)/z→π\sin(\pi z)/z \to \pi and P(z)/z→1P(z)/z \to 1, so Q=πQ = \pi:

sin⁡(πz)=πz∏n≥1(1−z2n2).\sin(\pi z) = \pi z\prod_{n\geq1} \Bigl(1 - \frac{z^2}{n^2}\Bigr) .

14. At z=12z = \frac12: 1=sin⁡π2=π2∏n≥1(1−14n2)=π2∏4n2−14n21 = \sin\frac\pi2 = \frac\pi2\prod_{n\geq1}\bigl(1 - \frac1{4n^2}\bigr) = \frac\pi2\prod\frac{4n^2-1}{4n^2}, so

π2=∏n≥14n24n2−1=lim⁡N→∞∏n=1N(2n)(2n)(2n−1)(2n+1)=lim⁡N→∞2⋅2⋅4⋅4⋯(2N)(2N)1⋅3⋅3⋅5⋯(2N−1)(2N+1):\frac\pi2 = \prod_{n\geq1}\frac{4n^2}{4n^2 - 1} = \lim_{N\to\infty}\prod_{n=1}^N \frac{(2n)(2n)}{(2n-1)(2n+1)} = \lim_{N\to\infty} \frac{2\cdot2\cdot4\cdot4\cdots(2N)(2N)} {1\cdot3\cdot3\cdot5\cdots(2N-1)(2N+1)} :

Wallis’s product, a one-line corollary of Euler’s factorization.

15. For ∣z∣≤r<1\abs z \leq r < 1 every factor lies in D(1,r2)⊆D(1,1)D(1, r^2) \subseteq D(1, 1), so P(z)/z=exp⁡(∑n≥1log⁡(1−z2/n2))P(z)/z = \exp\bigl( \sum_{n\geq1}\log(1 - z^2/n^2)\bigr): each partial product is the exponential of a partial sum, and both sides pass to the limit by continuity of exp⁡\exp. The double series

∑n≥1log⁡(1−z2n2)=−∑n≥1∑k≥1z2kk n2k=−∑k≥1ζ(2k)k z2k=−ζ(2) z2+O(z4)\sum_{n\geq1}\log\Bigl(1 - \frac{z^2}{n^2}\Bigr) = -\sum_{n\geq1}\sum_{k\geq1}\frac{z^{2k}}{k\,n^{2k}} = -\sum_{k\geq1}\frac{\zeta(2k)}k\,z^{2k} = -\zeta(2)\,z^2 + O(z^4)

rearranges by Fubini for series: ∑n,kr2kkn2k≤∑kζ(2k)r2k≤ζ(2)r21−r2<∞\sum_{n,k} \frac{r^{2k}}{kn^{2k}} \leq \sum_k\zeta(2k)r^{2k} \leq \zeta(2)\frac{r^2}{1-r^2} < \infty. Hence

P(z)=z exp⁡(−ζ(2)z2+O(z4))=z−ζ(2) z3+O(z5),P(z) = z\,\exp\bigl(-\zeta(2)z^2 + O(z^4)\bigr) = z - \zeta(2)\,z^3 + O(z^5) ,

and question 13 compares this with sin⁡(πz)=πz−π36z3+O(z5)\sin(\pi z) = \pi z - \frac{\pi^3}6z^3 + O(z^5): πζ(2)=π36\pi\zeta(2) = \frac{\pi^3}6, i.e. ζ(2)=π26\zeta(2) = \frac{\pi^2}6. The additive face (question 10) and the multiplicative face compute the same number.

16. On a compact K⊆C∖ZK \subseteq \C\setminus\Z the partial sums SN=1z+∑n≤N(1z−n+1z+n)S_N = \frac1z + \sum_{n\leq N}\bigl( \frac1{z-n} + \frac1{z+n}\bigr) (question 9, terms regrouped as 2zz2−n2=1z−n+1z+n\frac{2z}{z^2-n^2} = \frac1{z-n} + \frac1{z+n}) converge uniformly to πcot⁡(πz)\pi\cot(\pi z), so Theorem 16.15 gives SN′→(πcot⁡πz)′=−π2/sin⁡2(πz)S_N' \to (\pi\cot\pi z)' = -\pi^2/\sin^2(\pi z) uniformly on KK. Since SN′=−∑∣n∣≤N(z−n)−2S_N' = -\sum_{\abs n\leq N}(z - n)^{-2}:

π2sin⁡2(πz)=∑n∈Z1(z−n)2,\frac{\pi^2}{\sin^2(\pi z)} = \sum_{n\in\Z}\frac1{(z - n)^2} ,

the convergence normal on compacts of C∖Z\C\setminus\Z (terms O(n−2)O(n^{-2})).

17. At z=12z = \frac12 the left side is π2\pi^2; on the right, (12−n)2=(2n−1)24(\frac12 - n)^2 = \frac{(2n-1)^2}4 with 2n−12n - 1 running over all odd integers exactly once as nn runs over Z\Z:

π2=∑n∈Z4(2n−1)2=8∑m≥01(2m+1)2,∑m≥01(2m+1)2=π28.\pi^2 = \sum_{n\in\Z}\frac{4}{(2n-1)^2} = 8\sum_{m\geq0}\frac1{(2m+1)^2}, \qquad \sum_{m\geq0}\frac1{(2m+1)^2} = \frac{\pi^2}8 .

Parity split: ζ(2)=π28+∑n≥11(2n)2=π28+ζ(2)4\zeta(2) = \frac{\pi^2}8 + \sum_{n\geq1}\frac1{(2n)^2} = \frac{\pi^2}8 + \frac{\zeta(2)}4, so 34ζ(2)=π28\frac34\zeta(2) = \frac{\pi^2}8 and ζ(2)=π26\zeta(2) = \frac{\pi^2}6 once more.

18. With c=cot⁡θc = \cot\theta and cot⁡(2θ)=c2−12c\cot(2\theta) = \frac{c^2-1}{2c}: cot⁡θ−2cot⁡(2θ)=c−c2−1c=1c=tan⁡θ\cot\theta - 2\cot(2\theta) = c - \frac{c^2-1}c = \frac1c = \tan\theta. Hence πtan⁡(πz)=πcot⁡(πz)−2πcot⁡(2πz)\pi\tan(\pi z) = \pi\cot(\pi z) - 2\pi\cot(2\pi z), and question 9 at zz and at 2z2z gives

πcot⁡(πz)=1z+∑n≥12zz2−n2,2πcot⁡(2πz)=1z+∑n≥18z4z2−n2.\pi\cot(\pi z) = \frac1z + \sum_{n\geq1}\frac{2z}{z^2 - n^2}, \qquad 2\pi\cot(2\pi z) = \frac1z + \sum_{n\geq1}\frac{8z}{4z^2 - n^2} .

Both series converge absolutely at each fixed zz off the poles, so the difference may be regrouped at will: in the second series the even terms n=2mn = 2m give 8z4z2−4m2=2zz2−m2\frac{8z}{4z^2 - 4m^2} = \frac{2z}{z^2 - m^2} and cancel the first series entirely, leaving

πtan⁡(πz)=−∑m≥08z4z2−(2m+1)2=∑m≥08z(2m+1)2−4z2,\pi\tan(\pi z) = -\sum_{m\geq0}\frac{8z}{4z^2 - (2m+1)^2} = \sum_{m\geq0}\frac{8z}{(2m+1)^2 - 4z^2} ,

normally on compacts avoiding 12+Z\frac12 + \Z (terms O(m−2)O(m^{-2})).

19. For ∣z∣≤r<12\abs z \leq r < \frac12:

8z(2m+1)2−4z2=8z(2m+1)2∑k≥0(4z2(2m+1)2)k,\frac{8z}{(2m+1)^2 - 4z^2} = \frac{8z}{(2m+1)^2} \sum_{k\geq0}\Bigl(\frac{4z^2}{(2m+1)^2}\Bigr)^{k},

with ∑m,k8r (4r2)k(2m+1)−2k−2<∞\sum_{m,k}8r\,(4r^2)^k(2m+1)^{-2k-2} < \infty since 4r2<14r^2 < 1: Fubini rearranges the double sum into

πtan⁡(πz)=∑k≥08⋅4k λ(2k+2) z2k+1.\pi\tan(\pi z) = \sum_{k\geq0}8\cdot4^k\,\lambda(2k+2)\,z^{2k+1} .

Against πtan⁡(πz)=π2z+π43z3+O(z5)\pi\tan(\pi z) = \pi^2z + \frac{\pi^4}3z^3 + O(z^5): the coefficient of zz gives 8λ(2)=π28\lambda(2) = \pi^2 — question 17 again — and that of z3z^3 gives 32λ(4)=π4332\lambda(4) = \frac{\pi^4}3, i.e. λ(4)=π496\lambda(4) = \frac{\pi^4}{96}. Removing the even denominators, λ(4)=ζ(4)−2−4ζ(4)=1516ζ(4)\lambda(4) = \zeta(4) - 2^{-4}\zeta(4) = \frac{15}{16}\zeta(4): ζ(4)=1615⋅π496=π490\zeta(4) = \frac{16}{15}\cdot \frac{\pi^4}{96} = \frac{\pi^4}{90}, matching question 7.

20. cot⁡θ2−cot⁡θ=cos⁡θ2 sin⁡θ−cos⁡θ sin⁡θ2sin⁡θ2 sin⁡θ=sin⁡θ2sin⁡θ2 sin⁡θ=1sin⁡θ\cot\frac\theta2 - \cot\theta = \frac{\cos\frac\theta2\,\sin\theta - \cos\theta\,\sin\frac\theta2}{\sin\frac\theta2\,\sin\theta} = \frac{\sin\frac\theta2}{\sin\frac\theta2\,\sin\theta} = \frac1{\sin\theta}, the numerator being sin⁡(θ−θ2)\sin(\theta - \frac\theta2). With θ=πz\theta = \pi z, question 9 at z2\frac z2 reads πcot⁡πz2=2z+∑n≥14zz2−4n2\pi\cot\frac{\pi z}2 = \frac2z + \sum_{n\geq1}\frac{4z}{z^2 - 4n^2}, so

πsin⁡(πz)=πcot⁡πz2−πcot⁡(πz)=1z+∑n≥14zz2−4n2−∑n≥12zz2−n2.\frac{\pi}{\sin(\pi z)} = \pi\cot\frac{\pi z}2 - \pi\cot(\pi z) = \frac1z + \sum_{n\geq1}\frac{4z}{z^2 - 4n^2} - \sum_{n\geq1}\frac{2z}{z^2 - n^2} .

Absolute convergence permits the parity regrouping: even n=2mn = 2m in the subtracted series contributes 2zz2−4m2\frac{2z}{z^2-4m^2}, leaving +2zz2−4m2+\frac{2z}{z^2-4m^2} from the first sum, while odd nn survives with sign −-:

πsin⁡(πz)=1z+∑n≥1(−1)n 2zz2−n2.\frac{\pi}{\sin(\pi z)} = \frac1z + \sum_{n\geq1}(-1)^n\,\frac{2z}{z^2 - n^2} .

Signs check: Res⁡(π/sin⁡(πz),n)=π/(πcos⁡πn)=(−1)n\operatorname{Res}\bigl(\pi/\sin(\pi z), n\bigr) = \pi/(\pi\cos\pi n) = (-1)^n (Method 17.6), and (−1)n2zz2−n2=(−1)nz−n+(−1)nz+n(-1)^n\frac{2z}{z^2 - n^2} = \frac{(-1)^n}{z-n} + \frac{(-1)^n}{z+n} carries exactly that residue at ±n\pm n.

21. For ∣z∣≤r<1\abs z \leq r < 1, expanding each term as in question 19 ((−1)n2zz2−n2=(−1)n−12zn2∑kz2kn2k(-1)^n\frac{2z}{z^2-n^2} = (-1)^{n-1}\frac{2z}{n^2}\sum_k\frac{z^{2k}}{n^{2k}}) and applying Fubini:

πsin⁡(πz)=1z+2∑k≥0η(2k+2) z2k+1,η(s)=∑n≥1(−1)n−1ns.\frac{\pi}{\sin(\pi z)} = \frac1z + 2\sum_{k\geq0}\eta(2k+2)\,z^{2k+1}, \qquad \eta(s) = \sum_{n\geq1}\frac{(-1)^{n-1}}{n^s} .

Taylor side: sin⁡(πz)=πz(1−(πz)26+O(z4))\sin(\pi z) = \pi z(1 - \frac{(\pi z)^2}6 + O(z^4)) gives πsin⁡πz=1z+π26z+O(z3)\frac\pi{\sin\pi z} = \frac1z + \frac{\pi^2}6z + O(z^3): 2η(2)=π262\eta(2) = \frac{\pi^2}6, so η(2)=π212\eta(2) = \frac{\pi^2}{12}. Consistency: η(2)=ζ(2)−2∑n(2n)−2=(1−21−2)ζ(2)=ζ(2)2=π212\eta(2) = \zeta(2) - 2\sum_n(2n)^{-2} = (1 - 2^{1-2})\zeta(2) = \frac{\zeta(2)}2 = \frac{\pi^2}{12}.

22. At z=12z = \frac12, question 20 gives

π=2+∑n≥1(−1)n114−n2=2+4∑n≥1(−1)n−1(2n−1)(2n+1).\pi = 2 + \sum_{n\geq1}(-1)^n\frac{1}{\frac14 - n^2} = 2 + 4\sum_{n\geq1}\frac{(-1)^{n-1}}{(2n-1)(2n+1)} .

With 1(2n−1)(2n+1)=12(12n−1−12n+1)\frac1{(2n-1)(2n+1)} = \frac12\bigl(\frac1{2n-1} - \frac1{2n+1}\bigr), and both alternating series convergent (Leibniz criterion), the sum splits as 12[L−(1−L)]=L−12\frac12\bigl[L - (1 - L)\bigr] = L - \frac12, where L=1−13+15−⋯L = 1 - \frac13 + \frac15 - \cdots and 13−15+17−⋯=1−L\frac13 - \frac15 + \frac17 - \cdots = 1 - L. Hence π=2+4(L−12)=4L\pi = 2 + 4(L - \frac12) = 4L:

π4=1−13+15−17+⋯\frac\pi4 = 1 - \frac13 + \frac15 - \frac17 + \cdots

The moral: each kernel is meromorphic with poles on an arithmetic progression and prescribed residues. The cotangent puts residue 11 at every integer and sums f(n)f(n); its derivative squares the poles and prices λ(2)\lambda(2); the tangent moves the poles to 12+Z\frac12 + \Z and prices the odd denominators; π/sin⁡\pi/\sin keeps the integer poles but alternates the residues (−1)n(-1)^n, hence the alternating series. The first-order kernels are all odd functions: pairing nn with −n-n doubles the even-power coefficients and annihilates the odd ones, so ζ(2k)\zeta(2k) pours out mechanically while ζ(3)\zeta(3) never appears. The blindness is parity, not lack of technique.

23. With w=2iπzw = 2\iu\pi z:

iπz+2iπze2iπz−1=iπz e2iπz+1e2iπz−1=iπz eiπz+e−iπzeiπz−e−iπz=πz cos⁡πzsin⁡πz=πzcot⁡(πz).\iu\pi z + \frac{2\iu\pi z}{\eu^{2\iu\pi z} - 1} = \iu\pi z\,\frac{\eu^{2\iu\pi z} + 1}{\eu^{2\iu\pi z} - 1} = \iu\pi z\,\frac{\eu^{\iu\pi z} + \eu^{-\iu\pi z}}{\eu^{\iu\pi z} - \eu^{-\iu\pi z}} = \pi z\,\frac{\cos\pi z}{\sin\pi z} = \pi z\cot(\pi z) .

Hence, using the generating function on w=2iπzw = 2\iu\pi z (and B1=−12B_1 = -\frac12 cancelling the iπz\iu\pi z term, odd BB’s vanishing beyond):

πzcot⁡(πz)=∑k≥0B2k(2k)!(2iπz)2k=1+∑k≥1(−1)k(2π)2kB2k(2k)!z2k.\pi z\cot(\pi z) = \sum_{k\geq0}\frac{B_{2k}}{(2k)!} (2\iu\pi z)^{2k} = 1 + \sum_{k\geq1}(-1)^k\frac{(2\pi)^{2k}B_{2k}}{(2k)!} z^{2k} .

On the other hand the partial fraction expansion (Part IV) gives πzcot⁡(πz)=1−2∑k≥1ζ(2k)z2k\pi z\cot(\pi z) = 1 - 2\sum_{k\geq1}\zeta(2k)z^{2k} (expand each 2z2z2−n2=−2∑kz2kn2k\frac{2z^2}{z^2 - n^2} = -2\sum_k\frac{z^{2k}}{n^{2k}} and sum over nn, normal convergence justifying the interchange for ∣z∣<1\abs z < 1). Comparing coefficients: −2ζ(2k)=(−1)k(2π)2kB2k(2k)!-2\zeta(2k) = (-1)^k\frac{(2\pi)^{2k}B_{2k}}{(2k)!}, the stated formula.

24. k=1k = 1: (2π)22⋅2⋅16=π26\frac{(2\pi)^2}{2\cdot2}\cdot\frac16 = \frac{\pi^2}6. k=2k = 2: −(2π)42⋅24⋅(−130)=16π448⋅30=π490-\frac{(2\pi)^4}{2\cdot24} \cdot\bigl(-\frac1{30}\bigr) = \frac{16\pi^4}{48\cdot30} = \frac{\pi^4}{90}. k=3k = 3: (2π)62⋅720⋅142=64π61440⋅42=π6945\frac{(2\pi)^6}{2\cdot720} \cdot\frac1{42} = \frac{64\pi^6}{1440\cdot42} = \frac{\pi^6}{945}.

25. Write C(z)=πzcot⁡(πz)=1−2∑k≥1ζ(2k)z2kC(z) = \pi z\cot(\pi z) = 1 - 2\sum_{k\geq1}\zeta(2k)z^{2k} (question 23). Direct differentiation of C=πzcot⁡(πz)C = \pi z\cot(\pi z), using (cot⁡u)′=−1−cot⁡2u(\cot u)' = -1 - \cot^2u:

zC′(z)=πzcot⁡(πz)−π2z2(1+cot⁡2(πz))=C−π2z2−C2.zC'(z) = \pi z\cot(\pi z) - \pi^2z^2\bigl(1 + \cot^2(\pi z)\bigr) = C - \pi^2z^2 - C^2 .

Now expand both sides in powers of z2z^2. Left side: ∑k(−4k) ζ(2k) z2k\sum_k(-4k)\,\zeta(2k)\,z^{2k}. Right side: squaring the series,

C−C2=2∑k≥1ζ(2k)z2k−4∑k≥2(∑j=1k−1ζ(2j)ζ(2k−2j))z2k,C - C^2 = 2\sum_{k\geq1}\zeta(2k)z^{2k} - 4\sum_{k\geq2}\Bigl(\sum_{j=1}^{k-1}\zeta(2j) \zeta(2k-2j)\Bigr)z^{2k},

and the term −π2z2=−6ζ(2)z2-\pi^2z^2 = -6\zeta(2)z^2 only adjusts k=1k = 1. Comparing the coefficients of z2kz^{2k} for k≥2k \geq 2:

−4k ζ(2k)=2 ζ(2k)−4∑j=1k−1ζ(2j) ζ(2k−2j),-4k\,\zeta(2k) = 2\,\zeta(2k) - 4\sum_{j=1}^{k-1}\zeta(2j)\,\zeta(2k-2j),

i.e. (k+12)ζ(2k)=∑j=1k−1ζ(2j)ζ(2k−2j)\bigl(k + \frac12\bigr)\zeta(2k) = \sum_{j=1}^{k-1}\zeta(2j)\zeta(2k-2j). (At k=1k = 1 the identity reads −4ζ(2)=2ζ(2)−6ζ(2)-4\zeta(2) = 2\zeta(2) - 6\zeta(2): a consistency check, not new information.) Applications: k=2k = 2: 52ζ(4)=ζ(2)2=π436\frac52\zeta(4) = \zeta(2)^2 = \frac{\pi^4}{36}, so ζ(4)=π490\zeta(4) = \frac{\pi^4}{90}; k=3k = 3: 72ζ(6)=2ζ(2)ζ(4)=π6270\frac72\zeta(6) = 2\zeta(2)\zeta(4) = \frac{\pi^6}{270}, so ζ(6)=27⋅π6270=π6945\zeta(6) = \frac{2}{7}\cdot\frac{\pi^6}{270} = \frac{\pi^6}{945}. One transcendental seed (ζ(2)=π26\zeta(2) = \frac{\pi^2}6), and pure algebra generates every even zeta value.

Terms defined in this chapter

See all 395 terms in the glossary