As a matter of fact your sum diverges, a little manipulation shows that
sumnleqXfrac(−1)nphi(n)=sumnleqX,2|nfrac1phi(n)−sumnleqX,(n,2)=1frac1phi(n)=sumnleqX/2frac1phi(2n)−sumnleqX,(n,2)=1frac1phi(n)
The above equala to
sumnleqX/2,(n,2)=1frac1phi(2n)+sumnleqX/2,2|nfrac1phi(2n)−sumnleqX,(n,2)=1frac1phi(n)
By multiplicativity of phi(n) we have phi(2n)=phi(n) when (n,2)=1. Thus the first sum above is a sum over 1/phi(n) and the above equation simplifies to
−sumX/2<nleqX,(n,2)=1frac1phi(n)+sumnleqX/4frac1phi(4n)
It follows that
sumnleqXfrac(−1)nphi(n)=−sumX/2<nleqX,(n,2)=1frac1phi(n)+sumnleqX/4frac1phi(4n)simccdotlogX
because the first sum on the right converges to a constant, while the second sum on the right is asymptotically ccdotlogX.
EDIT: Put details, erased mention of an earlier confusion about (−1)n+1 not being a multiplicative function :P (it is!)
No comments:
Post a Comment