AMS / MAA TEXTBOOKS VOL 10

A Radical Approach
to Real Analysis
Second Edition

David Bressoud
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

10.1090/text/010

A Radical Approach to
Real Analysis
 © 2007 by
The Mathematical Association of America (Incorporated)
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 2006933946
Hardcover ISBN: 978-0-88385-747-2 (out of print)
Paperback ISBN: 978-1-93951-217-8
Electronic ISBN: 978-1-61444-623-1

Printed in the United States of America

Current Printing (last digit):
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

A Radical Approach to
Real Analysis
Second Edition

David M. Bressoud
Macalester College

Published and Distributed by

The Mathematical Association of America
 Committee on Books
Frank Farris, Chair
MAA Textbooks Editorial Board
Zaven A. Karian, Editor
George Exner
Thomas Garrity
Charles R. Hadlock
William Higgins
Douglas B. Meade
Stanley E. Seltzer
Shahriar Shahriari
Kay B. Somers
 MAA TEXTBOOKS
Bridge to Abstract Mathematics, Ralph W. Oberste-Vorth, Aristides Mouzakitis, and Bonita
A. Lawrence
Calculus Deconstructed: A Second Course in First-Year Calculus, Zbigniew H. Nitecki
Calculus for the Life Sciences: A Modeling Approach, James L. Cornette and Ralph A.
Ackerman
Combinatorics: A Guided Tour, David R. Mazur
Combinatorics: A Problem Oriented Approach, Daniel A. Marcus
Common Sense Mathematics, Ethan D. Bolker and Maura B. Mast
Complex Numbers and Geometry, Liang-shin Hahn
A Course in Mathematical Modeling, Douglas Mooney and Randall Swift
Cryptological Mathematics, Robert Edward Lewand
Differential Geometry and its Applications, John Oprea
Distilling Ideas: An Introduction to Mathematical Thinking, Brian P. Katz and Michael
Starbird
Elementary Cryptanalysis, Abraham Sinkov
Elementary Mathematical Models, Dan Kalman
An Episodic History of Mathematics: Mathematical Culture Through Problem Solving,
Steven G. Krantz
Essentials of Mathematics, Margie Hale
Field Theory and its Classical Problems, Charles Hadlock
Fourier Series, Rajendra Bhatia
Game Theory and Strategy, Philip D. Straffin
Geometry Illuminated: An Illustrated Introduction to Euclidean and Hyperbolic Plane Ge-
ometry, Matthew Harvey
Geometry Revisited, H. S. M. Coxeter and S. L. Greitzer
Graph Theory: A Problem Oriented Approach, Daniel Marcus
An Invitation to Real Analysis, Luis F. Moreno
Knot Theory, Charles Livingston
Learning Modern Algebra: From Early Attempts to Prove Fermat’s Last Theorem, Al
Cuoco and Joseph J. Rotman
The Lebesgue Integral for Undergraduates, William Johnston
Lie Groups: A Problem-Oriented Introduction via Matrix Groups, Harriet Pollatsek
Mathematical Connections: A Companion for Teachers and Others, Al Cuoco
Mathematical Interest Theory, Second Edition, Leslie Jane Federer Vaaler and JamesW.
Daniel
Mathematical Modeling in the Environment, Charles Hadlock
Mathematics for Business Decisions Part 1: Probability and Simulation (electronic text-
book), Richard B. Thompson and Christopher G. Lamoureux
Mathematics for Business Decisions Part 2: Calculus and Optimization (electronic text-
book), Richard B. Thompson and Christopher G. Lamoureux
Mathematics for Secondary School Teachers, Elizabeth G. Bremigan, Ralph J. Bremigan,
and John D. Lorch
The Mathematics of Choice, Ivan Niven
The Mathematics of Games and Gambling, Edward Packel
Math Through the Ages, William Berlinghoff and Fernando Gouvea
Noncommutative Rings, I. N. Herstein
Non-Euclidean Geometry, H. S. M. Coxeter
Number Theory Through Inquiry, David C. Marshall, Edward Odell, and Michael Starbird
Ordinary Differential Equations: from Calculus to Dynamical Systems, V. W. Noonburg
A Primer of Real Functions, Ralph P. Boas
A Radical Approach to Lebesgue’s Theory of Integration, David M. Bressoud
A Radical Approach to Real Analysis, 2nd edition, David M. Bressoud
Real Infinite Series, Daniel D. Bonar and Michael Khoury, Jr.
Teaching Statistics Using Baseball, 2nd edition, Jim Albert
Thinking Geometrically: A Survey of Geometries, Thomas Q. Sibley
Topology Now!, Robert Messer and Philip Straffin
Understanding our Quantitative World, Janet Andersen and Todd Swanson

MAA Service Center

P.O. Box 91112
Washington, DC 20090-1112
1-800-331-1MAA FAX: 1-240-396-5647
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

to the memory of my mother

Harriet Carnrite Bressoud
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

Preface

The task of the educator is to make the child’s spirit

pass again where its forefathers have gone, mov-
ing rapidly through certain stages but suppressing
none of them. In this regard, the history of science
must be our guide.
—Henri Poincaré

This course of analysis is radical; it returns to the roots of the subject. It is not a history
of analysis. It is rather an attempt to follow the injunction of Henri Poincaré to let history
inform pedagogy. It is designed to be a first encounter with real analysis, laying out its
context and motivation in terms of the transition from power series to those that are less
predictable, especially Fourier series, and marking some of the traps into which even great
mathematicians have fallen.
This is also an abrupt departure from the standard format and syllabus of analysis.
The traditional course begins with a discussion of properties of the real numbers, moves
on to continuity, then differentiability, integrability, sequences, and finally infinite series,
culminating in a rigorous proof of the properties of Taylor series and perhaps even Fourier
series. This is the right way to view analysis, but it is not the right way to teach it. It
supplies little motivation for the early definitions and theorems. Careful definitions mean
nothing until the drawbacks of the geometric and intuitive understandings of continuity,
limits, and series are fully exposed. For this reason, the first part of this book follows the
historical progression and moves backwards. It starts with infinite series, illustrating the
great successes that led the early pioneers onward, as well as the obstacles that stymied
even such luminaries as Euler and Lagrange.
There is an intentional emphasis on the mistakes that have been made. These highlight
difficult conceptual points. That Cauchy had so much trouble proving the mean value
theorem or coming to terms with the notion of uniform convergence should alert us to the
fact that these ideas are not easily assimilated. The student needs time with them. The highly
refined proofs that we know today leave the mistaken impression that the road of discovery
in mathematics is straight and sure. It is not. Experimentation and misunderstanding have
been essential components in the growth of mathematics.

ix
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

x Preface

Exploration is an essential component of this course. To facilitate graphical and numerical

investigations, Mathematica and Maple commands and programs as well as investigative
projects are available on a dedicated website at [Link]/aratra.
The topics considered in this book revolve around the questions raised by Fourier’s
trigonometric series and the restructuring of calculus that occurred in the process of an-
swering them. Chapter 1 is an introduction to Fourier series: why they are important and
why they met with so much resistance. This chapter presupposes familiarity with partial
differential equations, but it is purely motivational and can be given as much or as little
emphasis as one wishes. Chapter 2 looks at the background to the crisis of 1807. We
investigate the difficulties and dangers of working with infinite summations, but also the
insights and advances that they make possible. More of these insights and advances are
given in Appendix A. Calculus would not have revolutionized mathematics as it did if it
had not been coupled with infinite series. Beginning with Newton’s Principia, the physical
applications of calculus rely heavily on infinite sums. The chapter concludes with a closer
look at the understandings of late eighteenth century mathematicians: how they saw what
they were doing and how they justified it. Many of these understandings stood directly in
the way of the acceptance of trigonometric series.
In Chapter 3, we begin to find answers to the questions raised by Fourier’s series. We
follow the efforts of Augustin Louis Cauchy in the 1820s to create a new foundation to the
calculus. A careful definition of differentiability comes first, but its application to many of
the important questions of the time requires the mean value theorem. Cauchy struggled—
unsuccessfully—to prove this theorem. Out of his struggle, an appreciation for the nature
of continuity emerges.
We return in Chapter 4 to infinite series and investigate the question of convergence.
Carl Friedrich Gauss plays an important role through his complete characterization of
convergence for the most important class of power series: the hypergeometric series. This
chapter concludes with a verification that the Fourier cosine series studied in the first chapter
does, in fact, converge at every value of x.
The strange behavior of infinite sums of functions is finally tackled in Chapter 5. We
look at Dirichlet’s insights into the problems associated with grouping and rearranging
infinite series. We watch Cauchy as he wrestles with the problem of the discontinuity of
an infinite sum of continuous functions, and we discover the key that he was missing. We
begin to answer the question of when it is legitimate to differentiate or integrate an infinite
series by differentiating or integrating each summand.
Our story culminates in Chapter 6 where we present Dirichlet’s proof of the validity of
Fourier series representations for all “well behaved” functions. Here for the first time we
encounter serious questions about the nature and meaning of the integral. A gap remains in
Dirichlet’s proof which can only be bridged after we have taken a closer look at integration,
first using Cauchy’s definition, and then arriving at Riemann’s definition. We conclude with
Weierstrass’s observation that Fourier series are indeed strange creatures. The function
represented by the series
1 1 1
cos(π x) + cos(13π x) + cos(169π x) + cos(2197π x) + · · ·
2 4 8
converges and is continuous at every value of x, but it is never differentiable.
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

Preface xi

The material presented within this book is not of uniform difficulty. There are computa-
tional inquiries that should engage all students and refined arguments that will challenge the
best. My intention is that every student in the classroom and each individual reader striking
out alone should be able to read through this book and come away with an understanding of
analysis. At the same time, they should be able to return to explore certain topics in greater
depth.

Historical Observations
In the course of writing this book, unexpected images have emerged. I was surprised
to see Peter Gustav Lejeune Dirichlet and Niels Henrik Abel reveal themselves as the
central figures of the transformation of analysis that fits into the years from 1807 through
1872. While Cauchy is associated with the great theorems and ideas that launched this
transformation, one cannot read his work without agreeing with Abel’s judgement that
“what he is doing is excellent, but very confusing.” Cauchy’s seminal ideas required two
and a half decades of gestation before anyone could begin to see what was truly important
and why it was important, where Cauchy was right, and where he had fallen short of
achieving his goals.
That gestation began in the fall of 1826 when two young men in their early 20s, Gustav
Dirichlet and Niels Henrik Abel, met to discuss and work out the implications of what
they had heard and read from Cauchy himself. Dirichlet and Abel were not alone in this
undertaking, but they were of the right age to latch onto it. It would become a recurring
theme throughout their careers. By the 1850s, the stage was set for a new generation
of bright young mathematicians to sort out the confusion and solidify this new vision for
mathematics. Riemann and Weierstrass were to lead this generation. Dirichlet joined Gauss
as teacher and mentor to Riemann. Abel died young, but his writings became Weierstrass’s
inspiration.
It was another twenty years before the vision that Riemann and Weierstrass had grasped
became the currency of mathematics. In the early 1870s, the general mathematical com-
munity finally understood and accepted this new analysis. A revolution had taken place.
It was not an overthrow of the old mathematics. No mathematical truths were discred-
ited. But the questions that mathematicians would ask and the answers they would accept
had changed in a fundamental way. An era of unprecedented power and possibility had
opened.

Changes to the Second Edition

This second edition incorporates many changes, all with the aim of aiding students who
are learning real analysis. The greatest conceptual change is in Chapter 2 where I clarify
that the Archimedean understanding of infinite series is the approach that Cauchy and the
mathematical community has adopted. While this chapter still has a free-wheeling style in
its use of infinite series—the intent being to convey the power and importance of infinite
series—it also begins to introduce rigorous justification of convergence. A new section
devoted entirely to geometric series has been added. Chapter 4, which introduces tests of
convergence, has been reorganized.
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

xii Preface

I have also trimmed some of the digressions that I found led students to lose sight of my
intent. In particular, the section on the Newton–Raphson method and the proof of Gauss’s
test for convergence of hypergeometric series have been taken out of the text. Because I
feel that this material is still important, though not central, these sections and much more
are available on the web site dedicated to this book.

Web Resource: When you see this box with the designation “Web Resource”,
more information is available in a pdf file, Mathematica notebook, or Maple
worksheet that can be downloaded at [Link]/aratra. The box is
also used to point to additional information available in Appendix A.

I have added many new exercises, including many taken from Problems in Mathematical
Analysis by Kaczor and Nowak. Problems taken from this book are identified in Appendix C.
I wish to acknowledge my debt to Kaczor and Nowak for pulling together a beautiful
collection of challenging problems in analysis. Neither they nor I claim that they are the
original source for all of these problems.
All code for Mathematica and Maple has been removed from the text to the website. 
Exercises for which these codes are available are marked with the symbol M&M . The
appendix with selected solutions has been replaced by a more extensive appendix of hints.
I considered adding a new chapter on the structure of the real numbers. Ultimately,
I decided against it. That part of the story properly belongs to the second half of the
nineteenth century when the progress described in this book led to a thorough reappraisal
of integration. To everyone’s surprise this was not possible without a full understanding
of the real numbers which were to reveal themselves as far more complex than had been
thought. That is an entirely other story that will be told in another book, A Radical Approach
to Lebesgue’s Theory of Integration.

Acknowledgements
Many people have helped with this book. I especially want to thank the NSA and the
MAA for financial support; Don Albers, Henry Edwards, and Walter Rudin for their early
and enthusiastic encouragement; Ray Ayoub, Allan Krall, and Mark Sheingorn for helpful
suggestions; and Ivor Grattan-Guinness who was extremely generous with his time and
effort, suggesting historical additions, corrections, and references. The epilogue is among
the additions that were made in response to his comments. I am particularly indebted
to Meyer Jerison who went through the manuscript of the first edition very carefully and
pointed out many of the mathematical errors, omissions, and questionable approaches in the
early versions. Some was taken away and much was added as a result of his suggestions. I
take full responsibility for any errors or omissions that remain. Susan Dziadosz assisted with
the exercises. Her efforts helped weed out those that were impossible or incorrectly stated.
Beverly Ruedi helped me through many aspects of production and has shepherded this book
toward a speedy publication. Most especially, I want to thank the students who took this
course at Penn State in the spring of 1993, putting up with a very preliminary edition and
helping to identify its weaknesses. Among those who suggested improvements were Ryan
Anthony, Joe Buck, Robert Burns, Stephanie Deom, Lisa Dugent, David Dunson, Susan
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

Preface xiii

Dziadosz, Susan Feeley, Rocco Foderaro, Chris Franz, Karen Lomicky, Becky Long, Ed
Mazich, Jon Pritchard, Mike Quarry, Curt Reese, Brad Rothenberger, Chris Solo, Randy
Stanley, Eric Steel, Fadi Tahan, Brian Ward, Roger Wherley, and Jennifer White.
Since publication of the first edition, suggestions and corrections have come from many
people including Dan Alexander, Bill Avant, Robert Burn, Dennis Caro, Colin Denis,
Paul Farnham II, Julian Fleron, Kristine Fowler, Øistein Gjøvik, Steve Greenfield, Michael
Kinyon, Mary Marion, Betty Mayfield, Mi-Kyong, Helen Moore, Nick O’Neill, David
Pengelley, Mac Priestley, Tommy Ratliff, James Reber, Fred Rickey, Wayne Roberts,
Cory Sand, Karen Saxe, Sarah Spence, Volker Strehl, Simon Terrington, and Stan Wagon.
I apologize to anyone whose name I may have forgotten.

David M. Bressoud
bressoud@[Link]
October 20, 2006
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

Contents

Preface ix
1 Crisis in Mathematics: Fourier’s Series 1
1.1 Background to the Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Difficulties with the Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2 Infinite Summations 9
2.1 The Archimedean Understanding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.2 Geometric Series. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.3 Calculating π . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.4 Logarithms and the Harmonic Series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
2.5 Taylor Series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
2.6 Emerging Doubts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
3 Differentiability and Continuity 57
3.1 Differentiability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
3.2 Cauchy and the Mean Value Theorems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
3.3 Continuity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
3.4 Consequences of Continuity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
3.5 Consequences of the Mean Value Theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
4 The Convergence of Infinite Series 117
4.1 The Basic Tests of Convergence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
4.2 Comparison Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129

xv
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

16 Contents

4.3 The Convergence of Power Series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145

4.4 The Convergence of Fourier Series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
5 Understanding Infinite Series 171
5.1 Groupings and Rearrangements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172
5.2 Cauchy and Continuity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
5.3 Differentiation and Integration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
5.4 Verifying Uniform Convergence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
6 Return to Fourier Series 217
6.1 Dirichlet’s Theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
6.2 The Cauchy Integral . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236
6.3 The Riemann Integral . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248
6.4 Continuity without Differentiability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258
7 Epilogue 267
A Explorations of the Infinite 271
A.1 Wallis on π . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271
A.2 Bernoulli’s Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277
A.3 Sums of Negative Powers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284
A.4 The Size of n! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293
B Bibliography 303
C Hints to Selected Exercises 305
Index 317
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

Appendix A
Explorations of the Infinite

The four sections of Appendix A lead to a proof of Stirling’s remarkable formula for the
value of n!:
√
n! = nn e−n 2π n eE(n) , (A.1)

where limn→∞ E(n) = 0, and this error term can be represented by the asymptotic series

B2 B4 B6
E(n) ∼ + + + ··· , (A.2)
1 · 2 · n 3 · 4 · n3 5 · 6 · n5

where B1 , B2 , B3 , . . . are rational numbers known as the Bernoulli numbers. Note that we
do not write equation (A.2) as an equality since this series does not converge to E(n) (see
section A.4).
In this first section, we follow John Wallis as he discovers an infinite product that is equal
to π . While his formula is a terrible way to approximate π , it establishes the connection
between n! and π , explaining that curious appearance of π in equation (A.1). In section 2,
we show how Jacob Bernoulli was led to discover his mysterious and pervasive sequence
of numbers by his search for a simple formula for the sum of kth powers. We continue
the applications of the Bernoulli numbers in section 3 where we follow Leonhard Euler’s
development of formulæ for the sums of reciprocals of even powers of the positive integers.
It all comes together in section 4 when we shall prove this identity discovered by Abraham
deMoivre and James Stirling.

A.1 Wallis on π
When Newton said, “If I have seen a little farther than others it is because I have stood on
the shoulders of giants,” one of those giants was John Wallis (1616–1703). Wallis taught
271
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

272 Appendix A. Explorations of the Infinite

at Cambridge before becoming Savilian Professor of Geometry at Oxford. His Arithmetica

Infinitorum, published in 1655, derives the rule (found also by Fermat) for the integral of a
fractional power of x:
1
1 n
x m/n dx = = . (A.3)
0 1 + m/n m+n

We begin our development of Wallis’s formula for π with the observation that π is the
area of any circle with radius 1. If we locate the center of our circle at the origin, then the
quarter circle in the first quadrant has area
1
π
= (1 − x 2 )1/2 dx. (A.4)
4 0

This looks very much like the kind of integral Wallis had been studying. Any means of
calculating this integral will yield a means of calculating π . Realizing that he could not
attack it head on, Wallis looked for similar integrals that he could handle. His genius is
revealed in his decision to look at
1
(1 − x 1/p )q dx.
0
When q is a small positive integer, we can expand the integrand:
1 1
(1 − x 1/p )0 dx = dx
0 0
= 1,
1 1
(1 − x 1/p )1 dx = (1 − x 1/p ) dx
0 0
p
= 1−
p+1
1
= ,
p+1
1 1
(1 − x 1/p )2 dx = (1 − 2x 1/p + x 2/p ) dx
0 0
2p p
= 1− +
p+1 p+2
2
= ,
(p + 1)(p + 2)
1 1
(1 − x 1/p )3 dx = (1 − 3x 1/p + 3x 2/p − x 3/p ) dx
0 0
3p 3p p
= 1− + −
p+1 p+2 p+3
6
= .
(p + 1)(p + 2)(p + 3)
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

A.1 Wallis on π 273

A pattern is emerging, and it requires little insight to guess that

1
4!
(1 − x 1/p )4 dx = ,
0 (p + 1)(p + 2)(p + 3)(p + 4)
1
5!
(1 − x 1/p )5 dx = ,
0 (p + 1)(p + 2)(p + 3)(p + 4)(p + 5)
..
.

where 4! = 4 · 3 · 2 · 1 = 24, 5! = 5 · 4 · 3 · 2 · 1 = 120, and so on.

These numbers should look familiar. When p and q are both integers, we get reciprocals
of binomial coefficients,
q! 1
= p+q  ,
(p + 1)(p + 2) · · · (p + q) q

where
   
p+q p+q (p + q)!
= = .
q p p! q!
This suggested to Wallis that he wanted to work with the reciprocals of his integrals:
2 1
(p + 1)(p + 2) · · · (p + q)
f (p, q) = 1 (1 − x 1/p )q dx = . (A.5)
0 q!

We want to find the value of f (1/2, 1/2) = 4/π . Our first observation is that we can
evaluate f (p, q) for any p so long as q is a nonnegative integer. We use induction on q to
1
prove equation (A.5). As shown above, when q = 0 we have f (p, q) = 1/ 0 dx = 1. In
exercise A.1.2, you are asked to prove that

1  q q 1  q−1
1 − x 1/p dx = 1 − x 1/p dx. (A.6)
0 p+q 0

With this recursion and the induction hypothesis that

(p + 1)(p + 2) · · · (p + q − 1)
f (p, q − 1) = ,
(q − 1)!
it follows that
 
p + q (p + 1)(p + 2) · · · (p + q − 1) (p + 1)(p + 2) · · · (p + q)
f (p, q) = = .
q (q − 1)! q!
We also can use this recursion to find f (1/2, 3/2) in terms of f (1/2, 1/2):
1/2 + 3/2 4
f (1/2, 3/2) = f (1/2, 1/2) = f (1/2, 1/2).
3/2 3
We can now prove by induction (see exercise A.1.3) that
   
1 1 (2q)(2q − 2) · · · 4 1 1
f ,q − = f , . (A.7)
2 2 (2q − 1)(2q − 3) · · · 3 2 2
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

274 Appendix A. Explorations of the Infinite

Table A.1. Values of f (p, q) in terms of
= 4/π .

f (p, q)
p↓ q → −1/2 0 1/2 1 3/2 2 5/2 3 7/2 4

−1/2 ∞ 1 1
2

1
2
1
3

3
8
4
15

5
16
8
35

35
128

0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1/2
1
2

1
3
2
4
3

15
8
8
5

35
16
64
35

315
128

1 3 5 7 9
1 2
1 2
2 2
3 2
4 2
5

3/2
1
3

1 4
3

5
2
8
3

35
8
64
15

105
16
128
21

1155
128

3 15 35 63 99
2 8
1 8
3 8
6 8
10 8
15

5/2
4
15

1 8
5

7
2
64
15

63
8
128
15

231
16
512
35

3003
128

5 35 105 231 429

3 16
1 16
4 16
10 16
20 16
35

7/2
8
35

1 64
35

9
2
128
21

99
8
512
35

429
16
1024
35

6435
128

35 315 1155 3003 6435

4 128
1 128
5 128
15 128
35 128
70

What if p is a nonnegative integer or half-integer? The binomial coefficient is symmetric

in p and q,
   
p+q p+q (p + q)!
= = .
q p p! q!

It is only a little tricky to verify that for any values of p and q, we also have that f (p, q) =
f (q, p) (see exercise A.1.4). This can be used to prove that when p and q are positive
integers (see exercise A.1.5),
   
1 1 2 · 4 · 6 · · · (2p + 2q − 2) 1 1
f p − ,q − = f , . (A.8)
2 2 3 · 5 · · · (2p − 1) · 3 · 5 · · · (2q − 1) 2 2

Wallis could now construct a table of values for f (p, q), allowing
to stand for
f (1/2, 1/2) = 4/π (see Table A.1.).
We see that any row in which p is a positive integer is increasing from left to right, and
it is reasonable to expect that the row p = 1/2 is also increasing from left to right (see
exericse A.1.6 for the proof ). Recalling that
= 4/π , this implies a string of inequalities:

4 3 16 15 32 35 256 315
1< < < < < < < < .
π 2 3π 8 5π 16 35π 128
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

A.1 Wallis on π 275

These, in turn, yield inequalities for π/2:

4 π
< < 2,
3 2
64 π 16
< < ,
45 2 9
256 π 128
< < ,
175 2 75
16384 π 2048
< < .
11025 2 1225
It is easier to see what is happening with these inequalities if we look at our string of
inequalities in terms of the ratios that led us to find them in the first place:
4 3 4 4 3 5 4 6 4 3 5 7
1< < < · < · < · · < · · < ··· .
π 2 3 π 2 4 3 5 π 2 4 6
In general, we have that

3 · 5 · 7 · · · (2n − 1) 4 · 6 · 8 · · · (2n) 4 3 · 5 · 7 · · · (2n + 1)

< < . (A.9)
2 · 4 · 6 · · · (2n − 2) 3 · 5 · 7 · · · (2n − 1) π 2 · 4 · 6 · · · (2n)

This yields a general inequality for π/2 that we can make as precise as we want by taking
n sufficiently large:

22 · 42 · 62 · · · (2n)2 π 22 · 42 · 62 · · · (2n − 2)2 · (2n)

< < . (A.10)
1 · 32 · 52 · · · (2n − 1)2 · (2n + 1) 2 1 · 32 · 52 · · · (2n − 1)2

As n gets larger, these bounds on π/2 approach each other. Their ratio is 2n/(2n + 1)
which approaches 1. Wallis therefore concluded that

π 2 2 4 4 6 6
= · · · · · ··· . (A.11)
2 1 3 3 5 5 7

Note that this product alternately grows and shrinks as we take more terms.

Exercises

The symbol M&M indicates that Maple and Mathematica codes for this problem are
available in the Web Resources at [Link]/aratra.

A.1.1. M&M Consider Wallis’s infinite product for π/2 given in equation (A.11).
a. Show that the product of the kth pair of fractions is 4k 2 /(4k 2 − 1) and therefore
∞
3 4k 2
π =2 .
k=1
4k 2 − 1

b. How many terms of this product are needed in order to approximate π to 3-digit
accuracy?
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

276 Appendix A. Explorations of the Infinite

c. We can improve our accuracy if we average the upper and lower bounds. Prove that this
average is
22 · 42 · · · (2n) · (2n + 1/2)
.
1 · 32 · · · (2n − 1)2 · (2n + 1)
How large a value of n do we need in order to approximate π to 3-digit accuracy?

A.1.2. Prove equation (A.6).

A.1.3. Use equation (A.6) to prove equation (A.7) by induction on q.

A.1.4. Prove that

1  q 1  p
1 − x 1/p dx = 1 − x 1/q dx, (A.12)
0 0

and therefore f (p, q) = f (q, p).

A.1.5. Using the results from exercises A.1.3 and A.1.4, prove equation (A.8) when p and
q are positive integers.

A.1.6. Prove that if p is positive and q1 > q2 , then

 q1  q2
1 − x 1/p < 1 − x 1/p ,

for all x between 0 and 1, and therefore f (p, q1 ) > f (p, q2 ). Prove that if p is negative
and q1 > q2 , then f (p, q1 ) < f (p, q2 ).

A.1.7.
 M&M We have seen that as long as p or q is an integer, we have that f (p, q) =
p+q
. This suggests a way of defining binomial coefficients when neither p nor q are
q
1
integers. We would expect the value of 1/2 to be f (1/2, 1/2) = 4/π . Using your favorite
1 
computer algebra system, see what value it assigns to 1/2 . How should we define ab for
arbitrary real numbers a and b?

A.1.8. When p and q are integers, we have the relationship of Pascal’s triangle,

f (p, q) = f (p, q − 1) + f (p − 1, q). (A.13)

Does this continue to hold true when p and q are not both integers? Either give an example
where it does not work or prove that it is always true.

A.1.9. Show that if we use the row p = −1/2 to approximate π/2:

4 1 4 3 16 5 32 35
1> > > > > > > > > ··· ,
2π 2 3π 8 15π 16 35π 128
then we get the same bounds for π/2.
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

A.2 Bernoulli’s Numbers 277

A.1.10. What bounds do we get for π/2 if we use the row p = 3/2?

A.1.11. What bounds do we get for π/2 if we use the diagonal:

4 32 512 4094
1< <2< <6< < 20 < < 70 < · · ·?
π 3π 15π 35π

A.1.12. As far as you can, extend the table of values for f (p, q) into negative values of p
and q.

A.1.13. M&M Use the method of this section to find an infinite product that approaches
the value of
2 1
 1/3
f (2/3, 1/3) = 1 1 − x 3/2 dx .
0
 1

Compare this to the value of 1/3
given by your favorite computer algebra system.

A.2 Bernoulli’s Numbers

Johann and Jacob Bernoulli were Swiss mathematicians from Basel, two brothers who
played a critical role in the early development of calculus. The elder, Jacob Bernoulli, died
in 1705. Eight years later, his final masterpiece was published, Ars Conjectandi. It laid the
foundations for the study of probability and included an elegant solution to an old problem:
to find formulas for the sums of powers of consecutive integers. He bragged that with it he
had calculated the sum of the tenth powers of the integers up to one thousand,
110 + 210 + 310 + · · · + 100010 ,
in “half a quarter of an hour.”
The formula for the sum of the first k − 1 integers is

k2 k
1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + · · · + (k − 1) = − . (A.14)
2 2

The proof is simple:

1 + 2 + · · · + (k − 2) + (k − 1)
+ (k − 1) + (k − 2) + · · · + 2 + 1
= k + k + ··· + k + k = (k − 1)k.
No one knows who first discovered this formula. Its origins are lost in the mists of time.
Even the formula for the sum of squares is ancient,

k3 k2 k
12 + 22 + 32 + 42 + · · · + (k − 1)2 = − + . (A.15)
3 2 6

It was known to and used by Archimedes, but was probably even older. It took quite a bit
longer to find the formula for the sum of cubes. The earliest reference that we have to this
formula connects it to the work of Aryabhata of Patna (India) around the year 500 .. The
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

278 Appendix A. Explorations of the Infinite

formula for sums of fourth powers was discovered by ibn Al-Haytham of Baghdad about
1000 .. In the early 14th century, Levi ben Gerson of France found a general formula
for arbitary kth powers, though the central idea which draws on patterns in the binomial
coefficients can be found in other contemporary and earlier sources: Al-Bahir fi’l Hisab
(Shining Treatise on Calculation) written by al-Samaw’al in 1144 in what is now Iraq,
Siyuan Yujian (Jade Mirror of the Four Unknowns) written by Zhu Shijie in 1303 in China,
and Ganita Kaumudi written by Narayana Pandita in 1356 in India.

Web Resource: To see a derivation and proof of this historic formula for the
sum of kth powers based on properties of binomial coefficients, go to Binomial
coefficients and sums of kth powers.

Jacob Bernoulli may have been aware of the binomial coefficient formula, but that did
not stop him from finding his own. He had a brilliant insight. The new integral calculus
gave efficient tools for calculating limits of summations that today we call Riemann sums.
Perhaps it could be turned to the task of finding formulas for other types of sums.

The Bernoulli Polynomials

Jacob Bernoulli looked for polynomials, B1 (x), B2 (x), . . . , for which
k
1 + 2 + · · · + (k − 1) = B1 (x) dx,
0
k
12 + 22 + · · · + (k − 1)2 = B2 (x) dx,
0
k
13 + 23 + · · · + (k − 1)3 = B3 (x) dx,
0
..
.
k
1n + 2n + · · · + (k − 1)n = Bn (x) dx.
0

Such a polynomial must satisfy the equation

k+1
Bn (x) dx = k n . (A.16)
k

In fact, for each positive integer n, there is a unique monic1 polynomial of degree n that
satisfies this equation for all values of k, not only when k is a positive integer. It is easiest
to see why this is so by means of an example. We shall set

B3 (x) = x 3 + a2 x 2 + a1 x + a0

and show that there exist unique values for a2 , a1 , and a0 .

1 The coefficient of x n is 1.
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

A.2. Bernoulli’s Numbers 279

Substituting this polynomial for B3 (x) in equation (A.16), we see that

k+1  3 
k3 = x + a2 x 2 + a1 x + a0 dx
k
1 a2 a1 1 a2 a1
= (k + 1)4 + (k + 1)3 + (k + 1)2 + a0 (k + 1) − k 4 − k 3 − k 2 − a0 k
4 3 2 4 3 2
   
3 1 a2 a1
= k3 + + a2 k 2 + (1 + a2 + a1 )k + + + + a0 . (A.17)
2 4 3 2
The coefficients of the different powers of k must be the same on both sides:
3
0= + a2 , (A.18)
2
0 = 1 + a2 + a1 , (A.19)
1 a2 a1
0= + + + a0 . (A.20)
4 3 2
These three equations have a unique solution: a2 = −3/2, a1 = 1/2, a0 = 0, and so

3x 2 x
B3 (x) = x 3 − + . (A.21)
2 2

Integrating this polynomial from 0 to k, we obtain the formula for the sum of cubes:
1 
3x 2 x
1 + 2 + · · · + (k − 1) =
3 3 3
x −
3
+ dx
0 2 2
k4 k3 k2
= − + .
4 2 4
The first two Bernoulli polynomials are
1
B1 (x) = x − , (A.22)
2
1
B2 (x) = x 2 − x + . (A.23)
6
We now make an observation that will enable us to construct Bn+1 (x) from Bn (x). If we
differentiate both sides of equation (A.16) with respect to k, we get:

Bn (k + 1) − Bn (k) = nk n−1 . (A.24)

This implies that


n 0n−1 + 1n−1 + 2n−1 + · · · + (k − 1)n−1
= [Bn (1) − Bn (0)] + [Bn (2) − Bn (1)] + [Bn (3) − Bn (2)]
+ · · · + [Bn (k) − Bn (k − 1)]
= Bn (k) − Bn (0), (A.25)
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

280 Appendix A. Explorations of the Infinite

and therefore

Bn (k) − Bn (0) k
= 1n−1 + 2n−1 + · · · + (k − 1)n−1 = Bn−1 (x) dx. (A.26)
n 0

Our recursive formula is

x
Bn (x) = n Bn−1 (t) dt + Bn (0). (A.27)
0

Given that B4 (0) = −1/30, we can find B4 (x) by integrating B3 (x), multiplying by 4, and
then adding −1/30:
 4 
x x3 x2 1 1
B4 (x) = 4 − + − = x 4 − 2x 3 + x 2 − .
4 2 4 30 30
If we know the constant term in each polynomial: B1 (0) = −1/2, B2 (0) = 1/6, B3 (0) =
0, . . . , then we can successively construct as many Bernoulli polynomials as we wish.
These constants are called the Bernoulli numbers:
−1 1 −1
B1 = , B2 = , B3 = 0, B4 = , ...
2 6 30

A Formula for B n (x )
We can do even better. Recalling that B1 (x) = x + B1 and repeatedly using equation (A.27),
we see that
x
B2 (x) = 2 (t + B1 ) dt + B2
0

= x 2 + 2B1 x + B2 ,
x
B3 (x) = 3 (t 2 + 2B1 t + B2 ) dt + B3
0

= x 3 + 3B1 x 2 + 3B2 x + B3 ,
x
B4 (x) = 4 (t 3 + 3B1 t 2 + 3B2 t + B3 ) dt + B4
0

= x 4 + 4B1 x 3 + 6B2 x 2 + 4B3 x + B4 ,

..
.

A pattern is developing. Our coefficients are precisely the coefficients of the binomial
expansion. Pascal’s triangle has struck again. Once we see it, it is easy to verify by
induction (see exercise A.2.3) that
n(n − 1) n(n − 1)(n − 2)
Bn (x) = x n + nB1 x n−1 + B2 x n−2 + B3 x n−3
2! 3!
+ · · · + nBn−1 x + Bn . (A.28)

The only problem left is to find an efficient means of determining the Bernoulli numbers.
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

A.2. Bernoulli’s Numbers 281

A Recursive Formula for B n

We turn to equation (A.24), set k = 0, and assume that n is larger than one:

Bn (1) − Bn (0) = n · 0n−1 = 0. (A.29)

We use equation (A.28) to evaluate Bn (1):

0 = Bn (1) − Bn
 
n(n − 1) n(n − 1)
= 1 + nB1 + B2 + · · · + Bn−2 + nBn−1 + Bn − Bn , (A.30)
2! 2!
 
−1 n(n − 1) n(n − 1)
Bn−1 = 1 + nB1 + B2 + · · · + Bn−2 . (A.31)
n 2! 2!
It follows that
 
1 −1 1 −1
B5 = − 1+6· + 15 · + 20 · 0 + 15 ·
6 2 6 30
= 0,
 
1 −1 1 −1
B6 = − 1+7· + 21 · + 35 · 0 + 35 · + 21 · 0
7 2 6 30
1
= .
42
Continuing, we obtain
−1
B7 = 0, B8 = , B9 = 0,
30
5 −691
B10 = , B11 = 0, B12 = .
66 2730

Bernoulli’s Calculation
Equipped with equation (A.26) and the knowledge of B1 , B2 , . . . , B10 , we can find the
formula for the sum of the first k − 1 tenth powers:


k−1
1
i 10 = [B11 (k) − B11 ]
i=1
11

1 11
= (k + 11B1 k 10 + 55B2 k 9 + 165B3 k 8 + 330B4 k 7
11
+ 462B5 k 6 + 462B6 k 5 + 330B7 k 4 + 165B8 k 3

+ 55B9 k 2 + 11B10 k)
1 11 1 10 5 9 1 5
= k − k + k − k7 + k5 − k3 + k. (A.32)
11 2 6 2 66
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

282 Appendix A. Explorations of the Infinite

Since it is much easier to take powers of 1000 = 103 than of 1001, let us add 100010 =
30
10 to the sum of the tenth powers of the integers up to 999:
110 + 210 + 310 + · · · + 100010
1 1 5 1 5
= 1030 + 1033 − 1030 + 1027 − 1021 + 1015 − 109 + 103 .
11 2 6 2 66
This is a simple problem in arithmetic:
1 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000
00000 .00
+ 90 90909 09090 90909 09090 90909
09090 .90
− 50000 00000 00000 00000 00000
00000 .00
+ 83 33333 33333 33333 33333
33333 .33
− 10 00000 00000 00000
00000 .00
+ 1 00000 00000
00000 .00
− 5000
00000 .00
+ 75 .75
91 40992 42414 24243 42424 19242 42500
Seven and a half minutes is plenty of time.

Fermat’s Last Theorem

The Bernoulli numbers will make appearances in each of the next two sections. Once they
were discovered, mathematicians kept finding them again, and again, and again. One of the
more surprising places that they turn up is in connection with Fermat’s last theorem.
After studying Pythagorean triples, triples of positive integers satisfying
x 2 + y 2 = z2 ,
Pierre de Fermat pondered the question of whether such triples could exist when the
exponent was larger than 2. He came to the conclusion that no such triples exist, but never
gave a proof. It should be noted that if there is no solution to
x n + y n = zn ,
then there can be no solution to
x mn + y mn = zmn ,
because if x = a, y = b, z = c were a solution to the second equation, then x = a m ,
y = bm , z = cm would be a solution to the first. If we want to prove Fermat’s statement,
then it is enough to prove that there are no solutions when n = 4 and no solutions when n
is an odd prime.
The case n = 4 can be handled by methods described by Fermat. Euler essentially proved
the case n = 3 in 1753. His proof was flawed, but his approach was correct. Fermat’s
“theorem” for n = 5 came in pieces. Sophie Germain (1776–1831), one of the first women
to publish mathematics, showed that if a solution exists, then either x, y, or z must be
divisible by 5. Gustav Lejeune Dirichlet made his mark on the mathematical scene when,
in 1825 at the age of 20, he proved that the variable divisible by 5 cannot be even. In the
same year, Adrien Marie Legendre, then in his 70’s, picked up Dirichlet’s analysis and
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

A.2. Bernoulli’s Numbers 283

carried it forward to show the general impossibility of the case n = 5. Gabriel Lamé settled
n = 7 in 1839.
In 1847, Ernst Kummer proved that there is no solution in positive integers to
x p + y p = zp
whenever p is a regular prime. The original definition of a regular prime is well outside
the domain of this book, but Kummer found a simple and equivalent definition:
An odd prime p is regular if and only if it does not divide the numerator of any
of the Bernoulli numbers: B2 , B4 , B6 , . . . , Bp−3 .
The prime 11 is regular. Up to p − 3 = 8, the numerators are all 1. The prime 13 is regular.
So is 17. And 19. And 23. Unfortunately, not all primes are regular. The prime 37 is not,
nor is 59 or 67. Methods using Bernoulli numbers have succeeded in proving Fermat’s last
theorem for all primes below 4,000,000. The proof by Andrew Wiles and Richard Taylor
uses a very different approach.

Exercises

The symbol M&M indicates that Maple and Mathematica codes for this problem are
available in the Web Resources at [Link]/aratra.

A.2.1. M&M Find the polynomials B5 (x), B6 (x), B7 (x), and B8 (x).

A.2.2. M&M Graph the eight polynomials B1 (x) through B8 (x). Describe the symmetries
that you see. Prove your guess about the symmetry of Bn (x) for arbitrary n.

A.2.3. Prove equation (A.28) by induction on n.

A.2.4. Prove that

Bn (1 − x) = (−1)n Bn (x) (A.33)

provided n ≥ 1.

A.2.5. Prove that

B2n+1 = 0 (A.34)

provided that n ≥ 1.

A.2.6. Show how to use Bernoulli polynomials and hand calculations to find the sum
18 + 28 + 38 + · · · + 10008 .

A.2.7. Show how to use Bernoulli polynomials and hand calculations to find the sum
110 + 210 + 310 + · · · + 1,000,00010 .
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

284 Appendix A. Explorations of the Infinite


A.2.8. M&M Explore the factorizations of the numerators and of the denominators of
the Bernoulli numbers. What conjectures can you make?

A.2.9. M&M Find all primes less than 100 that are not regular. Show that 691 is not a
regular prime.

A.3 Sums of Negative Powers

Jacob Bernoulli and his brother Johann were also interested in the problem of summing
negative powers of the integers. The first such case is the harmonic series,
1 1 1
1+ + + ··· + ,
2 3 k
which by then was well understood. The next case involves the sums of the reciprocals of
the squares:
1 1 1
1+ 2
+ 2 + 2 + ··· .
2 3 4
We observe that this seems to approach a finite limit. The sum up to 1/1002 is 1.63498. Up
to 1/10002 it is 1.64393. In fact, the Bernoullis knew that it must converge because
1 1 1 1
< = − ,
n2 n(n − 1) n−1 n
and so
N N  
1 1 1
< 1+ −
n=1
n2 n=2
n−1 n
   
1 1 1
= 1+ 1− + −
2 2 3
   
1 1 1 1
+··· + − + −
N −2 N −1 N −1 N
1
= 2− .
N
The sum of the reciprocals of the squares must converge and it must converge to something
less than 2. What is the actual value of its limit?
It was around 1734 that Euler discovered that the value of this infinite sum is, in fact,
2
π /6. His proof stretched even the credulity of his contemporaries, but it is worth giving to
show the spirit of mathematical discovery. The fact that π 2 /6 = 1.64493 . . . is very close
to the expected value was convincing evidence that it must be correct.
Consider the power series expansion of sin(x)/x:

sin x x2 x4
=1− + + ··· . (A.35)
x 3! 5!
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

A.3 Sums of Negative Powers 285

We know that this function has roots at ±π , ±2π , ±3π , . . . , and so we should be able to
factor it:
sin x
x 
x 
x 
x 
= 1− 1+ 1− 1+ ...
x π π 2π 2π
   
x2 x2 x2
= 1− 2 1− 2 2 1 − 2 2 ... . (A.36)
π 2π 3π

We compare the coefficient of x 2 in equations (A.35) and (A.36) and see that
 
−1 1 1 1
=− + + + · · · ,
6 π2 22 π 2 32 π 2

or equivalently,

π2 1 1 1
= 1 + 2 + 2 + 2 + ··· . (A.37)
6 2 3 4

Comparing the coefficients of x 4 and doing a little bit of work, we can also find the
formula for the sum of the reciprocals of the fourth powers:

1 1 1 1 1 1
= 2 2 4 + 2 2 4 + 2 2 4 + ··· + 2 2 4 + 2 2 4 + ···
120 1 ·2 π 1 ·3 π 1 ·4 π 2 ·3 π 2 ·4 π
 1
= 2k2π 4
,
1≤j <k<∞
j

π4  1
= . (A.38)
120 1≤j <k<∞
j k2
2

If we square both sides of equation (A.37) and separate the pieces of the resulting product,
we see that
  
π4 1 1 1 1
= 1 + 2 + 2 + ··· 1 + 2 + 2 + ···
36 2 3 2 3
 1  1  1
= 2 2
+ 2 2
+
1≤j <k<∞
j k 1≤j =k<∞
j k ∞>j >k≥1
j k2
2

 ∞
 1
1
=2 + .
1≤j <k<∞
j 2 k 2 k=1 k 4

Using the result from equation (A.38), we obtain our formula:

 1 ∞
π4 π4
=2 + ,
36 120 k=1 k 4

π4 1 1 1
= 1 + 4 + 4 + 4 + ··· . (A.39)
90 2 3 4
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

286 Appendix A. Explorations of the Infinite

One can—and Euler did—continue this to find formulas for the sums of the reciprocals
of the other even powers,
∞ ∞ ∞
1 1 1
, , , ... .
k=1
k6 k=1
k8 k=1
k 10

In 1740, Euler discovered a formula that covered all of these cases.

A Generating Function
A problem that is not unreasonable at first glance is that of finding a power series expansion
for 1/(1 − ex ). It looks as if it should be quite straightforward. Expand as a geometric
series, use the power series for the exponential function, then rearrange (note that we need
to define 0! = 1):
1
= 1 + ex + e2x + e3x + · · ·
1 − ex
∞
= 1+ ekx
k=1

∞  
(kx)2 (kx)3
= 1+ 1 + kx + + + ···
k=1
2! 3!
∞  ∞
(kx)n
= 1+
k=1 n=0
n!
∞
 ∞
xn 
= 1+ kn ... whoa!
n=0
n! k=1

Something is wrong. We are getting infinite coefficients. We need to back up.

The constant term in the power series expansion should be the value of the function at
x = 0. There is our problem. If we set x = 0 in our original function, we get a zero in the
denominator. We can get rid of the zero in the denominator if we multiply the numerator
by x. The function we should try to expand is
x
.
1 − ex
We check what happens as x approaches 0 and see that we get −1. So far so good. It would
be nice if the constant were +1 instead, so we change the sign of the denominator. We are
looking for the coefficients in the power series expansion:

x
= 1 + a1 x + a2 x 2 + a3 x 3 + · · · . (A.40)
ex − 1

The fact that we have multiplied by −x is not going to make our original argument work,
but this power series should exist. There is little choice but to compute the coefficients, the
an , by brute force. We could do it by using Taylor’s formula, but those derivatives quickly
become very messy. Instead, we shall multiply both sides of equation (A.40) by ex − 1,
expanded as a power series, and then equate the coefficients of comparable powers of x to
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

A.3 Sums of Negative Powers 287

solve for the an :

x = (ex − 1)(1 + a1 x + a2 x 2 + a3 x 3 + · · · )
 
x2 x3 x4
= x+ + + + · · · (1 + a1 x + a2 x 2 + a3 x 3 + · · · )
2! 3! 4!
     
1 1 a1 1 a1 a2
=x+ + a1 x 2 + + + a2 x 3 + + + + a3 x 4 + · · · .
2! 3! 2! 4! 3! 2!
(A.41)

We obtain an infinite sequence of equations which we can solve for an :

1 −1
0= + a1 =⇒ a1 = ,
2 2
1 a1 1
0= + + a2 =⇒ a2 = ,
6 2 12
1 a1 a2
0= + + + a3 =⇒ a3 = 0.
24 6 2
We continue in this manner:
−1 1 −1
a4 = , a5 = 0, a6 = , a7 = 0, a8 = , ... .
720 30240 1209600
If you do not yet see what is happening, try multiplying each an by n!:
−1 1 −1
1 · a1 = , 2! · a2 = , 3! · a3 = 0, 4! · a4 = ,
2 6 30
1 −1
5! · a5 = 0, 6! · a6 = , 7! · a7 = 0, 8! · a8 = .
42 30
The Bernoulli numbers!
Once we see them, it is not hard to prove that they are really there. Equation (A.41)
implies that

1 a1 a2 a3 an−2 an−1
0= + + + + ··· + + . (A.42)
n! (n − 1)! (n − 2)! (n − 3)! 2! 1!

We multiply both sides by n!:

n(n − 1) n(n − 1)(n − 2)
0 = 1 + n a1 + (2! · a2 ) + (3! · a3 )
2! 3!
n(n − 1)
+··· + [(n − 2)! · an−2 ] + n [(n − 1)! · an−1 ]. (A.43)
2!
This is precisely the recursion that we saw in equation (A.30) for the Bernoulli numbers.
We have proven that

∞
x xn
= 1 + Bn . (A.44)
e −1
x
n=1
n!
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

288 Appendix A. Explorations of the Infinite

Euler’s Analysis
Once he had realized equation (A.44), Euler was off and running. One of the things that
it shows is that x/(ex − 1) is almost an even function: Bn is zero whenever n is odd and
larger than 1. If we add x/2 to both sides, we knock out the single odd power of x and
obtain an even function:
∞
 x 2m x x 2x + xex − x x(ex + 1)
1+ B2m = x + = = . (A.45)
m=1
(2m)! e −1 2 2(ex − 1) 2(ex − 1)

We replace x by 2t:
∞
 (2t)2m t(e2t + 1)
1+ B2m = 2t
m=1
(2m)! e −1

et + e−t
=t
et − e−t
= t coth t, (A.46)
where coth t is the hyperbolic cotangent of t. Euler knew that
eiz − e−iz
sin z = = −i sinh iz, (A.47)
2i
eiz + e−iz
cos z = = cosh iz, (A.48)
2
and so he saw that
cosh iz
z cot z = z
−i sinh iz
= iz coth iz
∞
 (2iz)2m
= 1+ B2m
m=1
(2m)!
∞
 (2z)2m
= 1+ (−1)m B2m . (A.49)
m=1
(2m)!

Euler knew of another expansion for z cot z. Recognizing that the denominator of cot z =
cos z/ sin z is zero whenever z = kπ , k any integer, he had found an infinite partial fraction
decomposition of the cotangent (see exercise A.3.16):
1 1 1 1 1 1
cot z = · · · + + + + + + + ···
z + 2π z+π z z−π z − 2π z − 3π
∞  
1  1 1
= + +
z k=1 z + kπ z − kπ

∞
1 z
= +2
z k=1
z − k2π 2
2

∞
1 z
= −2 2 π 2 − z2
. (A.50)
z k=1
k
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

A.3 Sums of Negative Powers 289

If we multiply by z, we get an alternate expression for z cot z:

∞
 z2
z cot z = 1 − 2
k=1
k 2 π 2 − z2
∞
 z2 /k 2 π 2
= 1−2
k=1
1 − z2 /k 2 π 2

∞  
z2 z4 z6
= 1−2 + + + · · ·
k=1
k2π 2 k4π 4 k6π 6
∞ 
 ∞
z2m
= 1−2
k=1 m=1
k 2m π 2m

∞  
z2m 1 1 1
= 1−2 1 + 2m + 2m + 2m + · · · . (A.51)
m=1
π 2m 2 3 4

Comparing the coefficients of z2m in equations (A.49) and (A.51), we see that
 
B2m 22m −2 1 1 1
(−1)m = 2m 1 + 2m + 2m + 2m + · · · , (A.52)
(2m)! π 2 3 4

or equivalently

1 1 1 (2π )2m
1+ + 2m + 2m + · · · = (−1)m+1 B2m . (A.53)
22m 3 4 2 · (2m)!

Euler had them all, provided the exponent was even:

∞
1 (2π )2 1 π2
= · = , (A.54)
n=1
n2 4 6 6

∞
1 (2π )4 1 π4
= · = , (A.55)
n=1
n4 2 · 24 30 90

∞
1 (2π )6 1 π6
= · = , (A.56)
n=1
n6 2 · 720 42 945
..
.

The function n−s which Euler had shown how to evaluate when s is a positive even
integer would come to play a very important role in number theory. Today it is called the
zeta function:
∞
1
ζ (s) = , s > 1.
n=1
ns

It can be defined for all complex values of s except s = 1. When Riemann laid out his
prescription for a proof that the number of primes less than or equal to x is asymptotically
x/ ln x, he conjectured that all of the nonreal roots of ζ (s) lie on the line of s’s with real
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

290 Appendix A. Explorations of the Infinite

part 1/2. This is known as the Riemann hypothesis. It says a great deal about the error that
is introduced when x/ ln x is used to approximate the prime counting function. It is still
unproven.

If the Exponent is Odd?

If the exponent is odd, it appears that there is no simple formula. The most that can be said,
and this was only proved in 1978 by Roger Apéry, is that

∞
1
n=1
n3

is definitely not a rational number.

Exercises

The symbol M&M indicates that Maple and Mathematica codes for this problem are
available in the Web Resources at [Link]/aratra.

A.3.1. M&M Calculate


100
1 
1000
1
2
and 2
.
n=1
n n=1
n

The first differs from π 2 /6 by about 1/100, the second from π 2 /6 by about 1/1000. This
suggests that

1  1N
+
N n=1
n2

should be a pretty good approximation to π 2 /6. Test this hypothesis for different values of
N, including at least N = 5000 and N = 10000.

A.3.2. M&M Calculate

N
1 N
1
and
n=1
n4 n=1
n6

for N = 100, 500, and 1000. Compare your results with the predicted values of π 4 /90 and
π 6 /945, respectively. Are you willing to believe Euler’s result? In each case, what is the
approximate size of the error?

A.3.3. Prove that if k is larger than 1, then

∞ ∞
 ∞
dx 1 dx
< < . (A.57)
N+1 xk n=N+1
nk N xk
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

A.3 Sums of Negative Powers 291

∞
Use these bounds to prove that N k
n=1 1/n differs from
k
n=1 1/n by an amount that lies
between
1 1
and .
(k − 1)(N + 1) k−1 (k − 1)N k−1

A.3.4. Set x = π/2 in equation (A.36) and see what identity you get. Does it look familiar?
It should.

A.3.5. Set x = π/3 in equation (A.36) and see what identity you get. What happens if you
set x = π/4?

A.3.6. Comparing the coefficients of x 6 in equations (A.35) and (A.36) tells us that

π6  1
= 2k2l2
. (A.58)
7! 1≤j <k<l<∞
j

Use this fact together with equations (A.37) and (A.38) to prove that
∞
1 π6
= .
k=1
k6 945

A.3.7. Consider the aborted derivation on page 286. Remember that any equality involving
infinite series must, in general, carry a restriction on those x’s for which it is valid. What
are the restrictions that need to go with each equality? Where precisely does the argument
go wrong?

A.3.8. M&M Graph the polynomials


N
xn
y =1+ Bn
n=1
n!

for N = 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12. Compare these to the graph of x/(ex − 1). Describe what you
see. Where does it appear that this series converges?

A.3.9. We observe that ∞ n=1 n

−2m
= 1 + 2−2m + · · · is always larger than 1. Use this fact
and equation (A.53) to prove that

2 · (2m)!
|B2m | > . (A.59)
(2π )2m

Evaluate this lower bound for B20 , B40 , and B100 . Do these numbers stay small or do they
get large? Express the lower bound in scientific notation with six digits of accuracy.

A.3.10. Show that limn→∞ ζ (n) = 1. Use this fact and the formula for Bn implied by
equation (A.53) to find the interval of convergence of the series 1 + ∞ n
n=1 Bn x /n!. Explain
your analysis of convergence at the endpoints.
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

292 Appendix A. Explorations of the Infinite


A.3.11. M&M Taylor’s theorem tells us that Bn must be the nth derivative of x/(ex − 1)
evaluated at x = 0. Verify that this is correct when n = 1, 2, 3, and 4 by finding the
derivatives.

A.3.12. Use the power series expansions of ex , cos x, and sin x to prove that

eix = cos x + i sin x. (A.60)

A.3.13. Use equation (A.60) to prove equations (A.47) and (A.48).


A.3.14. M&M Graph the polynomials


N
(2z)2m
y =1+ (−1)m B2m
m=1
(2m)!

for N = 2, 4, and 6. Compare these to the graph of z cot z. Describe what you see. Estimate
the radius of convergence for this series.

A.3.15. Determine the interval of convergence for the series in exercise A.3.14. Show the
work that supports your answer.

A.3.16. We assume that cot z has a partial fraction decomposition. This means that there
are constants, ak , such that
 ak
cot z = .
−∞<k<∞
z − kπ

To find the values of the ak , we multiply both sides by sin z,

 sin z
cos z = ak ,
−∞<k<∞
z − kπ

and then take the limit as z approaches mπ . Show that

sin z
z − kπ
approaches 0 if m = k and that it approaches cos mπ = (−1)m if m = k. Finish the proof
that am = 1.

A.3.17. M&M Graph the functions

1 N
z
RN (z) = +2 2 − k2π 2
z k=1
z

for N = 3, 6, 9, and 12. Compare these to the graph of cot z. Describe what you see. Where
does it appear that this series converges? Plot the differences cot(z) − RN (z) for various
values of N and find a reasonable approximation, in terms of N and z, to this error function.
Test the validity of your approximation for N = 1000.
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

A.4 The Size of n! 293

A.3.18. What are the exact values of

∞ ∞
1 1
8
and 10
,
n=1
n n=1
n

expressed as a power of π times a rational number?

A.3.19. Prove that B2m and B2m+2 always have opposite sign.

A.3.20. M&M Apéry proved that n−3 is not a rational number. We still do not know
if it can be written as π 3 times a rational number. Calculate

N
1
n3
n=1

for large values of N (at least 1000) and estimate the size of your error (see exer-
cise A.3.3).

A.4 The Size of n!

An accurate approximation to n! was discovered in 1730 in a collaboration between Abra-
ham de Moivre (1667–1754) and James Stirling (1692–1770). de Moivre was a French
Protestant. He and his parents had fled to London after the revocation of the Edict of Nantes
in 1685. Despite his brilliance, he was always a foreigner and never obtained an academic
appointment. He struggled throughout his life to support himself on the meager income
earned as a tutor. Stirling was a Jacobite and in 1716, a year after the Jacobite rebellion,
was expelled from Oxford for refusing to swear an oath of allegiance to the king. Because
of his politics, he too was denied an academic position.
Even though it was a joint effort, the formula that we will find is called Stirling’s formula.
This is primarily de Moivre’s own fault. When he published his result he gave Stirling credit
for finding the constant, but his language was sufficiently imprecise that the attribution of
the constant to Stirling could easily be misread as crediting him with the entire identity. In
any event, Stirling’s name does deserve to be attached to this identity because it was the
fruit of both their efforts.
Our first task is to turn n! into a summation so we can use an integral approximation.
This is easily accomplished by taking the natural logarithm:


n
ln(n!) = ln k.
k=1

We can bound this above and below by integrals:

n 
n n−1
ln x dx < ln k < ln(x + 1) dx + ln n,
1 k=1 0
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

294 Appendix A. Explorations of the Infinite

1.5

0.5

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
x

FIGURE A.1. Graphs of ln(x + 1) and ln x bounding the step function ln x .

where the value of nk=1 ln k is represented by the area under the staircase in Figure A.1.
Evaluating these integrals, we see that
n ln n − n + 1 < ln(n!) < n ln n − n + 1 + ln n,

n n
n n
e < n! < ne .
e e
This gives us a pretty good idea of how fast n! grows, but because the summands are
increasing, our upper and lower bounds get further apart as n increases, unlike the situation
when we estimated the rate of the growth of the harmonic series.

A Trick for Approximating Summations

To get a better approximation, we use a trick that is part of the repertoire of number theory
where there are many summations that need to be approximated. We rewrite ln k as the
integral of 1/x from x = 1 to x = k and then interchange the integral and the summation:

n 
n k
dx
ln k =
k=1 k=1 1 x
n n
k= x +1 1
= dx
1 x
n
n− x
= dx. (A.61)
1 x
We now split this integral into two pieces:
n
n− x n
n − x + 1/2 n
x − x − 1/2
dx = dx + dx
1 x 1 x 1 x
1 n
x − x − 1/2
= n ln n − n + 1 + ln n + dx. (A.62)
2 1 x
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

A.4 The Size of n! 295

0.2

0.1
x
2 4 6 8 10
0

−0.1

−0.2

−0.3

−0.4

−0.5

FIGURE A.2. Graph of (x − x − 1/2)/x.

The integrand in the last line has a graph that oscillates about and approaches the x-axis
(see Figure A.2). The limit of this integral as n approaches infinity exists because
∞
x − x − 1/2 n+1/2
x − x − 1/2
dx < dx
n x n x
x − 1/2
1/2
= dx
0 n+x
    
−1 1 1
= + n+ ln n + − ln n ,
2 2 2
(A.63)
which approaches 0 as n goes to infinity (see exercise A.4.1).
We have proven that
∞
1 x − x − 1/2
ln(n!) = n ln n − n + ln n + 1 + dx + E(n), (A.64)
2 1 x

where
∞
x − x − 1/2
E(n) = − dx
n x
approaches 0 as n approaches infinity. Equivalently,

n n √
n! = C n eE(n) (A.65)
e
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

296 Appendix A. Explorations of the Infinite

where
∞
x − x − 1/2
ln C = 1 + dx.
1 x
What is the value of C?

Evaluating C
Wallis’s formula comes to our aid in a very slick evaluation. Stirling’s formula implies that
√
(2n)! C(2n/e)2n 2n eE(2n)
=
n! · n! C 2 (n/e)2n n e2E(n)

22n 2 E(2n)−2E(n)
= e . (A.66)
C n
We solve for C and then do a little rearranging:
√
22n (n!)2 2 E(2n)−2E(n)
C= √ e
(2n)! n
(2 · 4 · 6 · · · 2n)2 2 E(2n)−2E(n)
= √ e
1 · 2 · 3 · · · 2n 2n
2 · 4 · 6 · · · 2n 2
= √ eE(2n)−2E(n)
1 · 3 · 5 · · · (2n − 1) 2n
√
2 · 4 · 6 · · · (2n − 2) · 2n E(2n)−2E(n)
= 2e . (A.67)
1 · 3 · 5 · · · (2n − 1)
Looking back at Wallis’s work, we see from equation (A.10) that
√
2 · 4 · 6 · · · (2n − 2) · 2n
1 · 3 · 5 · · · (2n − 1)
√
approaches π/2 as √ n gets large. That means that the right side of equation (A.67)
√
approaches 2 π/2 = 2π as n approaches √ infinity. Since the left side is independent of
n, the constant C must actually equal 2π . We have proven Stirling’s formula:
√
n! = nn e−n 2π n eE(n) , (A.68)

where E(n) is an error that approaches 0 as n gets large.

The Asymptotic Series for E (n)

Not long after deMoivre and Stirling published their formula for n! in 1730, both Leonard
Euler and Colin Maclaurin realized that something far more general was going on, a formula
for approximating arbitrary series that today is called the Euler–Maclaurin formula. Euler
wrote to Stirling in 1736 describing this general formula. Stirling wrote back in 1738
saying that Colin Maclaurin had also discovered this result. Euler’s proof was published
in 1738, Maclaurin’s in 1742. Because it takes very little extra work, we shall develop the
asymptotic series for E(n) in the more general context of the Euler-Maclaurin formula.
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

A.4 The Size of n! 297

n
We want to find a formula for k=1 f (k) where f is an analytic function for x > 0. We
set

n
S(n) = f (k)
k=1

and assume that S also can be defined for all x > 0 so that it is analytic. By Taylor’s
formula, we have that
S  (n) 2 S  (n) 3
S(n + x) = S(n) + S  (n)x + x + x + ··· .
2! 3!
We set x = −1 and observe that
S  (n) S  (n) S (4) (n)
f (n) = S(n) − S(n − 1) = S  (n) − + − + ··· .
2! 3! 4!
We want to invert this and write S  (n) in terms of f and its derivatives at n. In principle,
this is doable because
S  (n) S (4) (n) S (5) (n)
f  (n) = S  (n) − + − + ···
2! 3! 4!
S (4) (n) S (5) (n) S (6) (n)
f  (n) = S  (n) − + − + ···
2! 3! 4!
S (5) (n) S (6) (n) S (7) (n)
f  (n) = S (4) (n) − + − + ···
2! 3! 4!
..
.
In other words, we want to find the constants a1 , a2 , a3 , . . . such that

S  (n) = f (n) + a1 f  (n) + a2 f  (n) + a3 f  (n) + · · · . (A.69)

We substitute the expansions of the derivatives of f in terms of the derivatives of S into

equation (A.69). This tells us that
∞
 ∞ ∞
S (j ) (n)   S (j ) (n)
S  (n) = (−1)j −1 + ak (−1)j −k−1
j =1
j! k=1 j =k+1
(j − k)!

∞

j −1

  ak
 j −1 (j )
= S (n) + (−1) S (n) 1 + (−1)k . (A.70)
j =2 k=1
(j − k)!

This will be true if and only if

a1 a2 a3 aj −1
1− + − + · · · + (−1)j −1 = 0, j ≥ 2.
(j − 1)! (j − 2)! (j − 3)! 1!
This equation should look familiar. Except for the sign changes, it is exactly the equality
that we saw in equation (A.42) on page 287, an equality uniquely satisfied by the Bernoulli
numbers divided by the factorials. In our case,
Bk
ak = (−1)k .
k!
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

298 Appendix A. Explorations of the Infinite

Since we know that B2m+1 = 0 for m ≥ 1, we have shown that

∞
Bk (k)
S  (x) = f (x) + (−1)k f (x)
k=1
k!

∞
1 B2m (2m)
= f (x) + f  (x) + f (x). (A.71)
2 m=1
(2m)!

We do need to keep in mind that these have all been formal manipulations, what Cauchy
referred to as “explanations drawn from algebraic technique.” This derivation should be
viewed as suggestive. In no sense is it a proof. In particular, there is no guarantee that this
series converges.
Nevertheless, even when the series does not converge, it does provide useful approxi-
mations. If we now integrate each side of equation (A.71) from x = 1 to x = n and then
add S(1) = f (1), we get the Euler–Maclaurin formula.

Theorem A.1 (Euler–Maclaurin Formula). Let f be an analytic function for x > 0,

then, provided the series converge, we have that

n n ∞
1 B2m (2m−1)
f (k) = f (x) dx + f (n) + f (n)
k=1 1 2 m=1
(2m)!

∞
1 B2m (2m−1)
+ f (1) − f (1). (A.72)
2 m=1
(2m)!

When we set f (x) = ln x and use the fact that we know that the constant term is ln(2π )/2,
this becomes Stirling’s Formula:


n
1 1
ln(n!) = ln k = n ln n − n + ln n + ln(2π ) + E(n), (A.73)
k=1
2 2

where E(n) can be approximated by the asymptotic series,

∞
 B2m
E(n) ∼ . (A.74)
m=1
(2m)(2m − 1)n2m−1

Difficulties
√
Does the fact that the constant term is ln( 2π ) mean that
 
√ 
B2 B4 B6
1− + + + · · · = ln 2π = .9189385. . . ?
1·2 3·4 5·6
Hardly. If we try summing this series, we find that it does not approach anything. The first
few Bernoulli numbers are small, but as we saw in the last section, they start to grow. They
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

A.4 The Size of n! 299

Table A.2. Partial sums of de Moivre’s series.

N
N 1− m=1 B2m /2m(2m − 1)

1 0 .9166667
2 0 .9194444
3 0 .9186508
4 0 .9192460
5 0 .9184043
6 0 .9203218
7 0 .9139116
8 0 .9434622
9 0 .763818
10 2 .15625
11 −11 .2466
12 145 .602
13 −2047 .5
14 34061 .3
15 −657411 .0

grow faster than 2(2m)!/(2π )2m . Table A.2. lists the partial sums of

N
B2m
1− .
m=1
2m(2m − 1)
√
The first few values look good—up to N = 4 they seem to be approaching ln 2π —but
then they begin to move away and very quickly the series is lurching out of control.
What about the error function:
B2 B4 B6
E(n) ∼ + + + ··· ;
1 · 2n 3 · 4n3 5 · 6n5
does it converge? In exercises A.4.2 and A.4.3, the reader is urged to experiment with this
series. What you should see is that no matter how large n is, eventually this series will start
to oscillate with increasing swings. But that does not mean that it is useless. If you take the
first few terms, say the first two, then
√
nn e−n 2π n e1/(12n)−1/(360n )
3

is a better approximation to n! than just

√
nn e−n 2π n.

Something very curious is happening. As we take more terms, the approximation keeps
getting better up to some point, and then it starts to get worse as the series moves into its
uncontrolled swings. This is what we mean by an asymptotic series. Even though it does
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

300 Appendix A. Explorations of the Infinite

not converge, it does give an approximation to the quantity in question. How many terms
of the asymptotic series should you take? That depends on n. As n gets larger, you can go
farther. Infinite series do strange things.

Exercises

The symbol M&M indicates that Maple and Mathematica codes for this problem are
available in the Web Resources at [Link]/aratra.

A.4.1. Show that

    
−1 1 1
+ n+ ln n + − ln n
2 2 2
    
−1 1 1 1 1 2n
= + ln 1 + + ln 1 + .
2 2 2n 2 2n

Use this identity to prove (see equation (A.63)) that

∞
x − x − 1/2
lim dx = 0.
n→∞ n x

A.4.2. M&M Evaluate
√
nn e−n
3
2π n e1/(12n)−1/(360n )

for n = 5, 10, 20, 50, and 100 and compare it to n!.


A.4.3. M&M To see how many terms of the asymptotic series we should take, find the
summand in the asymptotic series that is closest to zero and stop at that term. For each of
the values n = 5, 10, 20, 50, and 100, find which summand is the smallest in absolute value.
Estimate the function of n that describes how many terms of the asymptotic series should
be taken for any given n. How accurately does this approximate n! when the number of
terms is chosen optimally?

A.4.4. Use the approximation

2(2m)!
|B2m | ≈
(2π )2m
to check your estimate from exercise A.4.3.

A.4.5. M&M Using the Euler–Maclaurin formula with f (x) = 1/x gives us an ap-
proximation for the harmonic series. Show that the constant term of the Euler–Maclaurin
formula is
∞
1  B2m
+ .
2 m=1 2m

Determine how useful this is in approximating the value of Euler’s γ .

P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

A.4 The Size of n! 301


A.4.6. M&M Use the Euler–Maclaurin formula to show that

n
1 1
= ln n + + γ − H (n)
k=1
k 2n
where H (n) can be approximated by the asymptotic series
∞
 B2m
H (n) ∼ .
m=1
2m n−2m
For each of the values n = 5, 10, 20, 50, and 100, find which summand is the smallest in
absolute value. Estimate the function of n that describes how many terms of the asymptotic
series should be taken for any given n. How accurately does this approximate the harmonic
series when the number of terms is chosen optimally?
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

Appendix B
Bibliography

Birkhoff, Garrett, A Source Book in Classical Analysis, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA,
1973.
Bonnet, Ossian, “Remarques sur quelques intégrales définies,” Journal de Mathématiques Pures et
Appliquées, vol. 14, August 1849, pages 249–256.
Borwein, J. M., P. B. Borwein, and D. H. Bailey, “Ramanujan, Modular Equations, and Approxima-
tions to Pi or How to Compute One Billion Digits of Pi,” The American Mathematical Monthly,
vol. 96, no. 3, March 1989, pages 201–219.
Cauchy, Augustin-Louis, Cours d’Analyse de l’École Royale Polytechnique, series 2, vol. 3 in Œuvres
complètes d’Augustin Cauchy, Gauthier-Villars, Paris, 1897.
Cauchy, Augustin-Louis, Leçons sur le calcul différentiel, series 2, vol. 4 in Œuvres complètes
d’Augustin Cauchy, Gauthier-Villars, Paris, 1899.
Cauchy, Augustin-Louis, Résumé des Leçons données a l’École Royale Polytechnique sur le calcul
infinitésimal, series 2, vol. 4 in Œuvres complètes d’Augustin Cauchy, Gauthier-Villars, Paris,
1899.
Dijksterhuis, E. J., Archimedes, translated by C. Dikshoorn, Princeton University Press, Princeton,
1987.
Dirichlet, G. Lejeune, Werke, reprinted by Chelsea, New York, 1969.
Dunham, William, Journey through Genius: the great theorems of mathematics, John Wiley & Sons,
New York, 1990.
Edwards, C. H., Jr., The Historical Development of the Calculus, Springer–Verlag, New York, 1979.
Euler, Leonhard, Introduction to Analysis of the Infinite, books I & II, translated by John D. Blanton,
Springer–Verlag, New York, 1988.
Gauss, Carl Friedrich, Werke, vol. 3, Königlichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften, 1876.
Grabiner, Judith V., The Origins of Cauchy’s Rigorous Calculus, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1981.
Grattan-Guinness, Ivor, Convolutions in French Mathematics, 1800–1840, vols. I, II, III, Birkhäuser
Verlag, Basel, 1990.
Grattan-Guinness, Ivor, The Development of the Foundations of Mathematical Analysis from Euler
to Riemann, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1970.

303
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

304 Appendix B. Bibliography

Grattan-Guinness, Ivor, Joseph Fourier, 1768–1830, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1972.
Hawkins, Thomas, Lebesgue’s theory of integration: its origins and development, 2nd edition,
Chelsea, New York, 1975.
Hermite, Charles and Thomas Jan Stieltjes, Correspondance d’Hermite et de Stieltjes, B. Baillaud
and H. Bourget, eds., Gauthier-Villars, Paris, 1903–1905.
Kaczor, W. J., and M. T. Nowak, Problems in Mathematical Analysis, vols. I, II, III, Student
Mathematical Library vols. 4, 12, 21, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2000–
2003.
Kline, Morris, Mathematical Thought from Ancient to Modern Times, Oxford, 1972.
Lacroix, S. F., An Elementary Treatise on the Differential and Integral Calculus, translated by
Babbage, Peacock, and Herschel with appendix and notes, J. Deighton and Sons, Cambridge,
1816.
Lacroix, S. F., Traité Élémentaire de Calcul Différentiel et de Calcul Intégral, 4th edition, Bachelier,
Paris, 1828.
Medvedev, Fyodor A., Scenes from the History of Real Functions, translated by Roger Cooke,
Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 1991.
Olsen, L., A new proof of Darboux’s theorem, American Mathematical Monthly, vol. 111 (2004),
pp. 713–715.
Poincaré, Henri, “La Logique et l’Intuition dans la Science Mathématique et dans l’Enseignement,”
L’Ensiegnement mathématique, vol. 1 (1889), pages 157–162.
Preston, Richard, “The Mountains of Pi,” The New Yorker, March 2, 1992, pages 36–67.
Riemann, Bernhard, Gesammelte Mathematische Werke, reprinted with comments by Raghavan
Narasimhan, Springer–Verlag, New York, 1990.
Rudin, Walter, Principles of Mathematical Analysis, 3rd edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1976.
Serret, J.-A., Calcul Différentiel et Intégral, 4th edition, Gauthier-Villars, Paris, 1894.
Struik, D. J., A Source Book in Mathematics 1200–1800, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1986.
Truesdell, C., “The Rational Mechanics of flexible or elastic bodies 1638–1788,” Leonardi Euleri
Opera Omnia, series 2, volume 11, section 2, Orell Füssli Turici, Switzerland, 1960.
Van Vleck, Edward B., “The influence of Fourier’s series upon the development of mathematics,
Science, N.S. vol. 39, 1914, pages 113–124.
Weierstrass, Karl Theodor Wilhelm, Mathematische werke von Karl Weierstrass, 7 volumes, Mayer
& Muller, Berlin, 1894–1927.
Whittaker, E. T., and G. N. Watson, A Course of Modern Analysis, 4th ed., Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, 1978.
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

Appendix C
Hints to Selected Exercises

Exercises which can also be found in Kaczor and Nowak are listed at the start of each
section following the symbol KN . The significance of 3.1.2 = II:2.1.1 is that exercise
3.1.2 in this book can be found in Kaczor and Nowak, volume II, problem 2.1.1.
2.1.6 Use the fact that 1 + x + x 2 + · · · + x k−1 = (1 − x k )/(1 − x).
2.1.8 If you stop at the kth term, how far away are the partial sums that have more
terms?

2.2.1 Use the fact that 1 + x + x 2 + · · · + x k−1 = (1 − x k )/(1 − x).

2.2.4 Take the first 3k + 3 terms and rewrite this finite summation as (1 + 2−3 + 2−6 +
· · · + 2−3k ) + (2−1 + 2−4 + 2−7 + · · · + 2−(3k+1) ) − (2−2 + 2−5 + 2−8 + · · · +
2−(3k+2) ).
2.2.6 Use the work from exercise 2.2.5.
2.2.8 Find an expression in terms of r and s for a partial sum of a rearranged series that
uses the first r positive summands and the first s negative summands. Show that
you can get as close as desired to the target value provided only that r and s are
sufficiently close, regardless of their respective sizes.

2.3.4 Take pairs of terms and assume that regrouping of the summands is allowed.
2.3.5 Take the tangent of each side and use the formula
tan x + tan y
tan(x + y) = .
1 − tan x tan y

2.3.8 Explain what happens when you take a = −1 in equation (2.20).

305
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

306 Appendix C. Hints to Selected Exercises

2.4.10 Begin by separating the summands according to the total number of digits in the
denominator:
 
1 1 1
+ + ··· +
1 2 8
 
1 1 1 1 1
+ + + ··· + + + ··· +
10 11 18 20 88
 
1 1 1
+ + + ··· +
100 101 888
 
1 1 1
+··· + + + · · · +
10k 10k + 1 8(10k+1 − 1)/9
+··· .
a. There are 8 summands in the first pair of parentheses. Show that there are
72 = 8 · 9 in the second, 648 = 8 · 92 in the third, 5832 = 8 · 93 in the fourth,
and that in general there are 8 · 9k in the k + 1st. Hint: what digits are you
allowed to place in the first position? in the second? in the third?
b. Each summand in a given pair of parentheses is less than or equal to the first
term. Show that the sum of the terms in the k + 1st parentheses is strictly less
than 8 · 9k /10k , and thus our series is bounded by
8 8 · 9 8 · 92 8 · 93
+ + 2
+ + ··· .
1 10 10 103
c. Evaluate the geometric series given above.
2.4.14 Show that
   
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1+ + ··· + = 1+ + + ··· + − 1+ + + ··· + .
3 2n − 1 2 3 2n 2 2 3 n
∞ ∞
1 1 dx
2.4.16 Show that 2
< 2+ .
m=n
m n n x2
2.4.18 Work with the fraction of the road that you have covered. The first step takes you
1/2000th of the way, the next step 1/4000th, the third 1/6000th.

2.5.3 Integration by parts.

2.5.15 Is c the same for all values of n?

2.6.5 How can you use the fact that e−1/x has all of its derivatives equal to 0 at x = 0?
2


KN 3.1.2 = II:2.1.1, 3.1.3 = II:2.1.2, 3.1.4 = II.2.1.3, 3.1.5 = II.2.1.4, 3.1.6 = II:2.1.5,
3.1.15 = II:2.1.8, 3.1.16 = II:2.1.10b, 3.1.17 = II:2.1.9b, 3.1.18 = II:2.1.12,
3.1.19 = II:2.1.13, 3.1.20 = II:2.1.13.
3.1.2 For those functions with |x|, consider x > 0 and x < 0 separately. Use the definition
of the derivative at x = 0. For functions with x , consider x ∈ Z separately. Use
the definition of the derivative at x ∈ Z.
3.1.3 logx a = (ln a)/(ln x).
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

Appendix C. Hints to Selected Exercises 307

3.1.4 Consider the transition points: Is the function continuous there? If it is, rely on the
definition of the derivative.
3.1.15 xf (a) − af (x) = (x − a)f (a) − a(f (x) − f (a)). The same trick will work in
part (b).
f (x)ex − f (0)e0 f (x) cos x − f (0) cos 0
3.1.16 Rewrite the fraction as ÷ .
x−0 x−0
3.1.19 (b) Consider f (x) = x 2 sin(1/x), x = 0.
3.1.20 Rewrite
f (xn ) − f (zn ) f (xn ) − f (a) xn − a f (zn ) − f (a) a − zn
= · + · .
xn − zn xn − a xn − zn zn − a xn − zn
f (xn ) − f (a) f (zn ) − f (a)
Show that this must lie between and . Why doesn’t
xn − a zn − a
this approach work when xn and zn lie on the same side of a?

3.2.9 Show that there is a k between 0 and x for which

f (x0 + 2x) − 2f (x0 + x) + f (x0 ) f  (x0 + 2k) − f  (x0 + k)
= .
x 2 k
Define g(h) = f  (x0 + k + h), so that
f (x0 + 2x) − 2f (x0 + x) + f (x0 ) g(k) − g(0)
= .
x 2 k
Use the generalized mean value theorem a second time.

KN 3.3.4 = II:1.2.1, 3.3.5 = II:1.2.2, 3.3.6 = II:1.2.3, 3.3.7 = II:1.2.4, 3.3.8 = II:1.3.3,
3.3.9 = II:1.3.4, 3.3.10 = II:1.3.7, 3.3.11 = II:1.3.10, 3.3.12 = II:1.3.11, 3.3.13 =
II:1.3.12, 3.3.14 = II:1.2.6, 3.3.15 = II:1.2.7, 3.3.34 = II:2.1.23.
√ √
3.3.3 What fractions in ( 2 − 1, 2 + 1) have denominators ≤ 5?
3.3.4 Where is sin x = 0?
3.3.6 For rational numbers, f (p/q) = p/(q + 1). What is the difference between p/q
and f (p/q)?
3.3.8 Apply the intermediate value theorem to the function g defined by g(x) = f (x) − x.
3.3.11 Consider g(x) = f (x + 1) − f (x), 0 ≤ x ≤ 1.
3.3.12 f (2) − f (0) = (f (2) − f (1)) + (f (1) − f (0)).
3.3.13 Start by explaining why f (i + 1) − f (i) cannot be strictly positive for all integer
values of i ∈ [0, n − 1].
3.3.14 Consider separately the cases x 2 ∈ N, x 2 ∈ N.
3.3.15 Consider separately the cases x ∈ N, x ∈ N.
3.3.17

| sin(x + h) − sin x| = |(sin x)(cos h − 1) + (cos x)(sin h)|

≤ | sin x| · | cos h − 1| + | cos x| · | sin h|
≤ | cos h − 1| + | sin h|.
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

308 Appendix C. Hints to Selected Exercises

Graph | cos h − 1| + | sin h| and find an interval containing h = 0 where this func-
tion is less than 0.1.
3.3.18

|(x + h)2 − x 2 | = |2xh + h2 |

= |h| · |2x + h|
≤ |h| · |2 + h|.

3.3.22 Use the power series for ln(1 + x) to show that ln(1 + x) < x for x > 0, and
therefore if a > b > 0 then
 
a−b a−b
ln a − ln b = ln 1 + < .
b b
3.3.27 Since f is continuous on any interval that does not contain 0, you only need to
prove that if c1 ≤ 0 ≤ c2 and if A is between f (c1 ) and f (c2 ), then there is some c,
c1 < c < c2 , for which f (c) = A.
3.3.28 When does a small change in x result in a change in f (x) that cannot be made
arbitrarily small?
f (x) f (c) f (x) g(c) − g(x) f (x) − f (c)
3.3.33 − = · + .
g(x) g(c) g(x) g(c) g(c)

KN 3.4.6 = I:1.1.7–12, 3.4.23 = II:2.1.24, 3.4.24 = II:2.1.25, 3.4.25 = II:2.1.26,
3.4.26 = II:2.1.27, 3.4.27 = II:2.1.28, 3.4.28 = II:2.1.29, 3.4.29 = II:1.2.17, 3.4.30
= II:2.2.1.
3.4.1 The function cannot be continuous.
3.4.2 The domain cannot be a closed, bounded interval.
3.4.4 Prove the contrapositive. Explain why if A and B have opposite signs, then
|A − B| ≥ |A|.
3.4.5 What exactly is the technical statement that corresponds to this condition? For
every pair ( , δ), what must exist? What happens for very large values of ? Does
this technical statement of existence make sense as the definition of a vertical
asymptote?
3.4.6 (h) If you hold n constant, what value of m, 1 ≤ m ≤ 2n − 1 maximizes this
expression? (j) How close can this expression get to 1? (n) Find the minimum
value of x/y + 4y/x in the first quadrant. (o) Set m = kn and find the values of k
that maximize, minimize the resulting expression. (r) Find the maximum value of
xy/(1 + x + y) in the first quadrant.
3.4.11 Given the sequences x1 ≤ x2 ≤ · · · ≤ xk ≤ · · · < · · · ≤ yk ≤ · · · ≤ y2 ≤ y1 , let c
be the least upper bound of {x1 , x2 , x3 , . . .}. Prove that c ∈ [xk , yk ] for every k.
3.4.12 Let S be the set of all x for which a ≤ x < x2 and g(x) ≥ g(x2 ). If S is not empty,
then it is bounded and so has a least upper bound, call it B ≤ x2 . Note that B may
or may not be in S.
a. Use the continuity of g to prove that g(B) ≥ g(x2 ).
b. Use the fact that we can make |g  (x2 ) − (g(x2 ) − g(x))/(x2 − x)| as small as we
wish by taking x sufficiently close to x2 to prove that B < x2 .
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

Appendix C. Hints to Selected Exercises 309

c. Use the fact that B < x2 , g(B) ≥ g(x2 ), and g  (x) ≥ 0 to prove that there are
elements of S that are strictly larger than B. This implies that B is not an upper
bound and so S must be the empty set.
3.4.13 Assume that we can find a pair (x1 , x2 ), a ≤ x1 < x2 ≤ b, for which f (x1 ) > f (x2 ).
It follows that there is a positive number α such that
f (x2 ) − f (x1 )
< −α < 0.
x2 − x1
3.4.16 If | sin(1/c) − c−1 cos(1/c)| > 1, then c cannot be in the range of g.
3.4.19 Let c = e(−8n+1)π/4 , n ∈ N, and try to find an x for which sin(ln c) + cos(ln c) =
sin(ln x). What are other values of c ∈ (0, 1) that do not correspond to any value of
x?
3.4.20 Recall Theorem 3.4.
3.4.22 Start by proving that between any two real roots of P there must be at least
one real root of P  . If a polynomial P has a root of order n > 1 at x = a, then
P (x) = (x − a)n Q(x) where Q is a polynomial, Q(a) = 0. The derivative P  (x) =
n(x − a)n−1 Q(x) + (x − a)n Q (x) has a root of order n − 1 at x = a.
3.4.24 If f has a local maximum at x = c, then f− (c) ≥ 0 (why?). Let d = sup{x | f (x) >
f (c)/2}. Show that f− (d) ≤ 0. Complete the proof.
3.4.25 Use the idea that helped us prove the mean value theorem.
3.4.26 Use the result of exercise 3.4.25.
3.4.27 Use the result of exercise 3.4.26.
3.4.28 Let c = inf {x ∈ (a, b) | f (x) = 0}. Why is this set non-empty?
3.4.30 Consider f (x)eαx .

KN 3.5.2 = II2.3.6, 3.5.3 = II:2.3.7, 3.5.4 = II:2.2.11, 3.5.17 = II:2.3.8, 3.5.18 =
II:2.3.34.
3.5.1 Prove the contrapositive.
3.5.2 Consider negative as well as positive values of x.
3.5.4 Consider derivatives.
3.5.11 Rewrite the limit as
e−1/x x −1
2

lim = lim 1/x 2 .

x→0 x x→0 e

3.5.17 Differentiate each side of

[f (x) − f (0)] g  (θ (x)) = [g(x) − g(0)] f  (θ (x))

with respect to x, collect the terms that involve θ  (x) on one side, divide both sides
by x, and then take the limit of each side as x → 0+ .
3.5.18 Rewrite f (x)g(x) as eg(x) ln(f (x)) .

KN 4.1.16 = I:3.4.10a.
4.1.1 In this case we know that the partial sum to n terms differs from the value of the
series by exactly (1/2)n /(1 − 1/2) = 1/2n−1 .
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

310 Appendix C. Hints to Selected Exercises

4.1.3 For an alternating series with summands whose absolute values are decreasing
toward zero, the partial sum approximation differs from the target value by at most
the absolute value of the next term.
4.1.7 A function f is even if and only if f (−x) = f (x).
4.1.14 Are the hypotheses of the Alternating Series Test satisfied?
4.1.15 Combine consecutive summands with the same sign.
4.1.16 Write out enough terms that you get a feel for n . Combine consecutive summands
with the same sign.

KN 4.2.4 = I:2.2.50, 4.2.5 = I:3.2.1, 4.2.6 = I:3.4.1, 4.2.7 = I:3.4.13, 4.2.29 = I:3.2.17.
4.2.1 How do you know that for all n sufficiently large, |an | < 1?
4.2.2 Use the definition of convergence. To what value does this series converge? Show
that given any > 0, there is some N so that all of the partial sums past the N th
differ from this value by less than .
4.2.4 (a) The arctangent function is bounded. (d) To test for absolute convergence, com-
bine consecutive pairs of terms. (f ) Show that n/(n + 1)2 > 1/(n + 3).
√ √
4.2.5 (a) n2 + 1 − 3 n3 + 1 = n(1 + 1/n2 )1/2 − n(1 + 1/n3 )1/3 . Use a Taylor poly-
nomial approximation. (b) Show that limn→∞ (n/(n + 1))n+1 = limn→∞ (1 +
1/n)−n−1 = 1/e. (c) Use a Taylor polynomial approximation. (f ) Use the root
test.
4.2.6 (b) When does the rational function of a have absolute value less than 1? (c) Use
the root test.
4.2.8 Show that if n ≥ N, then |an | ≤ |aN | α n−N and so
 
n
|an | ≤ α n |aN |/α N .

4.2.22 Prove and then use the fact that for k ≥ 2:

1 1
> .
k ln(k ln 2) 2k ln k

4.2.24 Show that n1+(ln ln n+ln ln ln n)/ ln n = n(ln n)(ln ln n).

4.2.28 Use Stirling’s formula in place of the factorials.
4.2.29 (a) 2n/2 > 2n for n > 8.

KN 4.3.1 = I:3.3.2, 4.3.2 = I:3.3.3, 4.3.3 = I:3.3.6, 4.3.4 = I:3.3.7, 4.3.18 = I:2.4.11,
4.3.20 = I:2.4.15, 4.3.21 = I:2.4.19, 4.3.22 = I:2.4.20, 4.3.23 = I:2.4.26, 4.3.24 =
II:1.2.18, 4.3.25 = II:1.2.19, 4.3.26 = II:1.2.20.
4.3.1 (a) Using the limit ratio test, we have absolute convergence if

(n + 1)3 |x|n+1
1 > lim = |x|.
n→∞ n3 |x|n
Check for convergence at x = +1 and at x = −1. (d) Using the lim sup root test,
we have absolute convergence when

1 > lim (2 + (−1)n )x = 3 |x|.

n→∞
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

Appendix C. Hints to Selected Exercises 311

Check for convergence at x = 1/3 and at x = −1/3. (f ) Rewrite this summation

so that the power
√
of x is the index of summation: ∞ n n2
n=1 2 x = ∞ m=1 am x
m

where am = 2 m if m is a perfect square, am = 0 if m is not a perfect square.

Now use the lim sup root test. (h) Use the lim sup root test and remember that
limn→∞ (1 + 1/n)n = e.
4.3.2 (b) Use the lim sup root test. This converges absolutely if
 1/n
n 2x + 1 2x + 1
1 > lim = .
n→∞ n + 1 x x
Check what happens when |(2x + 1)/x| = 1, i.e. when 2x + 1 = x and when 2x +
1 = −x.
4.3.3 (a) This implies that limn→∞ |an x n |1/n = |x| limn→∞ L1/n n−α/n .
√
4.3.4 (a) Since the radius of convergence is R, we know that limn→∞ n |an x n | = 1/R. It
√
follows that limn→∞ n |2n an x n | = 2/R. (c) Use Stirling’s formula.
4.3.6 Do the summands approach 0 when |x| equals the radius of convergence?
4.3.7 Use Stirling’s formula.
4.3.8 Use Stirling’s formula.
4.3.11 Use the ratio test.
4.3.12 This is a hypergeometric series.
4.3.13 Show that
(2n)! (2n)!
1 · 3 · 5 · · · (2n − 1) = = n .
2 · 4 · 6 · · · 2n 2 · n!
If we ignore F (n) in equation (4.15), how close is this approximation when
n = 10? = 20? = 100?
4.3.14 Either use the result of exercise 4.3.13 together with Stirling’s formula, or use the
fact that limk→∞ (1 + 1/k)k = e.
4.3.18 (a) Let α = p/q where gcd(p, q) = 1. The answer is in terms of q.
4.3.20 First show that it is enough to prove the last two inequalities. Use the equivalent
definition on the lim sup found in exercise 4.3.19.
4.3.21 Use the result from exercise 4.3.20.
4.3.23 Show that it is enough to prove the last inequality. Let
an+1
A = lim .
n→∞ an

choose an > 0 and a response N such that for all n ≥ N , an+1 /an < A + . Show
that for n ≥ N , an < AN (A + )n−N . Take the limit as n approaches infinity of the
nth root of this upper bound.

4.4.2 Use equation (4.27).

4.4.4 At x = 1/2,
n
1 − (−1)n cos(π n/2) √
(−1)k−1 cos[(2k − 1)π/4] = ≤ 2.
k=1
2 cos(π/4)
√
By equation (4.23), |Tn − Tm | ≤ 2 2/(2m + 1).
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

312 Appendix C. Hints to Selected Exercises

4.4.12 (c) Use Dirichlet’s test with bk = ck R k and ak = (x/R)k = eikθ .

5.1.1 The regrouped series has initial term 2/3 and ratio 1/9.
5.1.10 Choose any ten terms from the original series to be the first ten terms of the
rearranged series. Can the remaining terms be arranged so that the resulting series
converges to the target value? Does it matter in what order we put the first ten
terms?

5.2.1 Show that the function represented by this series is not continuous.
5.2.4 For all x ∈ [−π, π ], this is an alternating series and therefore the sum of the first
N terms differs from the value of the series by an amount whose absolute value is
less than |x|2N+1 /(2N + 1)!.
5.2.7
1 1 1 1 1
−1 + − + − + − ···
4 9 16 25 36
   
1 1 1 1 1 1
=− 1+ + + + ··· + 2 + + + ··· .
4 9 16 4 16 36
5.2.8 What is the power series expansion of ln(1 − x)?
5.2.9 Use the partial sums

n
xk
Sn (x) =
k=1
k2

and the fact that

|Li2 (1) − Li2 (x)| ≤ |Li2 (1) − Sn (1)| + |Sn (1) − Sn (x)| + |Sn (x) − Li2 (x)|.

KN 5.3.2 = II:3.2.29.
5.3.1 Consider functions for which fk (x) = 0 for all k and all x.
5.3.2 Show that it converges at x = 0. Explain why it is enough to show that for any N
and any x,
∞
 ∞
1 1
≤ ,
n=N+1
n +x
2 2
n=N+1
n2

and then explain why this is true.

5.3.4 Use equation (4.28) from page 166.
5.3.6 Show that
x2 1 1
= − .
(1 + kx 2 )(1+ (k − 1)x )
2 1 + (k − 1)x 2 1 + kx 2
5.3.7 Show that |G(x) − Gn (x)| = | sin x|/(1 + nx 2 ). Given > 0, find x0 > 0 so that
|x| ≤ x0 implies that | sin x|/(1 + nx 2 ) ≤ | sin x| ≤ | sin x0 | < . For this value
of x0 , find an N so that n ≥ N and |x| ≥ x0 implies that | sin x|/(1 + nx 2 ) ≤
1/(1 + nx 2 ) ≤ 1/(nx02 ) < . Explain why this proves that the convergence is
uniform.
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

Appendix C. Hints to Selected Exercises 313


KN 5.4.1 = II:3.2.2, 5.4.12 = II:3.2.14.
5.4.1 (a) For each n, find the supremum of {n2 x 2 e−n |x| | x ∈ R}. (c) Show that for
2

any n, there is an x > 0 for which the nth summand is equal to 2n and all of
the summands beyond the nth are ≥ 0. Explain why you cannot have uniform
convergence if this is true. (f ) Show that arctan x + arctan x −1 = π/2, and therefore
the nth summand is equal to arctan(1/(n2 (1 + x 2 ))). Explain why this is less than
or equal to 1/(n2 (1 + x 2 )).
5.4.2 Use the fact that a1 + 2a2 x + 3a3 x 2 + · · · converges uniformly and absolutely on
(0, R).
5.4.5 Find the values of N that are responses to at x = a, over the open interval (a, b),
and at x = b.
5.4.6 Consider summands that are not continuous at x = a or x = b.
5.4.10 Show that for any n ≥ 2:
∞
 
2n
sin kπ/n sin kπ/n
≥
k=2
ln k k=2
ln k
 
− sin π/n 
n
1 1
= + sin(kπ/n) −
ln(n + 1) k=2
ln k ln(k + n)

− sin π/n 
n
ln 2
≥ + sin(kπ/n)
ln(n + 1) k=2
(ln n)(ln 2n)
 
f (n) ln 2 1 ln 2
= − sin(π/n) + ,
(ln n)(ln 2n) ln(n + 1) (ln n)(ln 2n)
where
f (n) = sin(π/n) + sin(2π/n) + sin(3π/n) + · · · + sin(nπ/n).
Use equation (5.64) to show that
sin(π/n)
f (n) = .
1 − cos(π/n)
5.4.12 (c) Show that 2 sin(n2 x) sin(nx) = cos(n(n − 1)x) − cos(n(n + 1)x).
(d) Rewrite the summation as
sin(nx)
π  π  sin(nx)
∞ ∞
arctan(nx) − + .
n=1
n 2 2 n=1 n
In the first sum, let bn (x) = π/2 − arctan(nx). (e) Rewrite the summation as
∞
 (−1)n+1
n−a/2 .
n=1
nx−a/2
∞
5.4.13 Consider k=1 x −x
k k−1
on [0, 1].

6.1.4 Show that f (x) = f (−x), g(x) = −g(−x).

6.1.5 If f is even and g is odd, then F (−x) = f (x) − g(x).
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

314 Appendix C. Hints to Selected Exercises

6.1.6 If the Fourier series converges at x = 0, then ∞k=1 ak converges, and therefore the
partial sums of ∞ a
k=1 k are bounded.
6.1.9 Find an algebraic expression for this function on (−1, 1).
6.1.10 Uniform convergence means that you are allowed to interchange integration and
infinite summation.
6.1.18 Change variables using t = α + β − u and let h(u) = g(α + β − u). Show that h
is nonnegative and increasing on [α, β].

6.2.2 Where is the graph of y = x 3 − 2x 2 + x increasing? Where is it decreasing? Where

is the slope steepest?
6.2.4 Fix > 0. Put a bound on the error contributed by using an approximating sum over
the interval [0, ]. Use the fact that sin(1/x) is continuous on the interval [ , 1].
6.2.6 Use the mean value theorem.
6.2.7 We need a bounded, differentiable function whose derivative is not bounded.
6.2.11 Use the definition of differentiability. You must show that
x
x0 f (t) dt
lim − f (x0 ) = 0.
x→x0 x − x0

6.2.12 Consider Theorem 3.14.


KN 6.3.8 = III:1.1.7, 6.3.9 = III:1.1.6, 6.3.10 = III:1.1.14.
6.3.2 Show that given any σ > 0, there is a response δ so that for any partition with
subintervals of length < δ, the variation is less than σ .
6.3.7 Fix a variation σ . Can we limit the sum of the lengths of the intervals on which the
variation exceeds σ ?
6.3.8 Where is this function discontinuous? How large is the variation at the points of
discontinuity?
6.3.10 (d) 1/(n + k) = (1/2n)(2/(1 + k/n). (f ) First show that the function of n is equal
n
to e k=1 (1/n) ln(1+k/n) .
6.3.11 The summation is an approximation using a partition with infinitely many intervals
of the form [q n+1 , q n ]. Show that for any > 0, we can find a Riemann sum with
intervals of length less than 1 − q that differs from our infinite summation by less
than .
∞  ∞ ∞
1 1 1
6.3.13 = − .
n=1
(2n − 1) 2
n=1
n 2
n=1
(2n) 2

6.3.20 Note that at points of discontinuity, the function decreases. Otherwise, it is an

increasing function. Show that if we approximate f (x) with 100 2
n=1 ((nx))/n , then
we are within 1/200 of the correct value. Now explain why it follows that if
0 ≤ x < y ≤ 1, then


100
ny − nx 1 1
f (y) − f (x) < + < (y − x)( ln(101) + γ ) + .
n=1
n2 100 100
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

Appendix C. Hints to Selected Exercises 315

6.3.16 Write f (x) = fN (x) + RN (x) where

∞
((nx))
RN (x) = .
n=N+1
n2

Given an > 0, the task is to show how to find a response δ such that for 0 < ν < δ,
|fN (x + ν) + RN (x + ν) − fN (x + 0) − RN (x + 0)| < .
6.3.19 Let σ (k) be the sum of the divisors of k, and set k = 2a k1 where k1 is odd. Show
that ψ(k) = (2a+1 − 3)σ (k1 ). It is known that
σ (k)
= eγ .
lim
k ln ln k
This is Gronwall’s Theorem, published in 1913.
6.3.20 Show that
∞ ∞ ∞ ∞
1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1
g(1/5) = + − −
5 n=0 5n + 1 5 n=0 5n + 2 5 n=0 5n + 3 5 n=0 5n + 4
∞
 125n2 + 125n + 26
= .
n=0
5(5n + 1)(5n + 2)(5n + 3)(5n + 4)

6.3.21 Let x = p/q, gcd(p, q) = 1. Let m = (q − 1)/2 . Show that


m 
m ∞

((kx)) 1
g(x) = + ((kx))
k qn +k
k=1  k=−m ∞ n=1 
m
1  1
= ((kx)) − 2k .
k=1
k n=1
q 2 n2 − k 2

6.4.1 Consider Theorem 3.14.

6.4.10 Use the fact that αm is an integer that is odd when m is even and even when m is
odd.

A.1.2 Start with

1  q 1  q−1 1  q−1 1/p
1 − x 1/p = 1 − x 1/p dx − 1 − x 1/p x dx
0 0 0
1  q−1
= 1 − x 1/p dx
0
 
1  q−1 −x (1−p)/p
+p 1 − x 1/p x dx,
0 p
and then use integration by parts on the second integral.
A.1.4 Use the substitution u = (1 − x 1/p )q .
A.1.8 Using equations (A.6) and (A.12), we see that
p+q p+q
f (p, q) + f (p, q − 1) = f (p − 1, q).
q p
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

316 Appendix C. Hints to Selected Exercises

A.1.12 The values are undefined when p or q is a negative integer, but it is defined for
other negative values of p and q.
A.1.13 Show that f (2/3, k) = (5 · 8 · 11 · · · (3k + 2))/(3 · 6 · 9 · · · (3k)). Show that
f (2/3, 1/3 + k) = f (2/3, 1/3) (6 · 9 · 12 · · · (3k + 3))/(4 · 7 · 10 · · · (3k + 1)).

A.2.4 Use the fact that equation (A.16) defines Bn (x). Show that
k+1 k+1
k Bn (1 − x) dx = (−1)n k Bn (x) dx.
A.2.5 Use equation (A.33) from the previous exercise and equation (A.29).

A.3.6 Use the fact that

∞ ∞ ∞
1  1  1  1
2 4
= 2 4
+ .
j =1
j k=1 k j =k
j k k=1
k6

Find the coefficients of the summmations on the right side:

 3
∞   1 ∞
 1  = ?× 1 1
2 2 2 2
+ ? × 2 4
+ ? × .
j =1
j 1≤j <k<l<∞
j k l j =k
j k k=1
k6

A.3.9 Rather than trying to evaluate 100!, find

   2m

2 · (2m)!
A = ln = ln n − (2m − 1) ln 2 − (2m) ln π.
(2π )2m n=1

Use the observation that

2 · (2m)!
= eA = 10A/ ln 10 .
(2π )2m
∞
A.3.10 Show that ζ (n) < 1 + 1 x −n dx = 1 + 1/(n − 1).
A.3.19 Use equation (A.53).
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

Index

Abel, Niels Henrik, xi, 160–161, 163, 169, 174, Berkeley, George, 50–52
182, 203, 209, 244 Bernoulli numbers, 118, 128, 271, 280–283,
Abel’s lemma (theorem 4.16), 161, 209, 244 287, 297
absolute convergence, 125, 175, 220, 248 Bernoulli polynomials, 269, 278–280
absolute convergence theorem (corollary 4.4), Bernoulli’s identity, 40
126 Bernoulli, Daniel, 4, 52–54, 248
absolute uniform convergence (corollary 5.10), Bernoulli, Jacob, 118, 271, 277–282,
204 284
addition of series (theorem 5.4), 178 Bernoulli, Johann, 40, 52, 109, 277, 284
al-Samaw’al, 278 binomial series, 25, 129
algebraic numbers, 263 convergence, 122, 146, 153, 206
alternating harmonic series, 13, 16 d’Alembert’s investigation of convergence,
alternating series, 126 41–43
alternating series test (corollary 4.5), 126 Bolzano, Bernhard, 57, 78, 81, 84, 90, 258
Ampère, André Marie, 161, 258 Bolzano–Weierstrass theorem, 84
analytic function, 54 Bonnet, Ossian, 72, 102, 220, 244
Apéry, Roger, 290 Bonnet’s lemma (lemma 6.9), 244
Archimedean principle, 12 Bonnet’s mean value theorem (lemma 6.5), 231,
Archimedean understanding, 12, 18 233, 244
Archimedes of Syracuse, 9–11, 19, 22, 237, 277 Borel, Émile, 268
arctangent
series expansion, 23 Cantor, Georg, 84, 268
Aryabhata, 277 Cauchy, Augustin Louis, ix–xi, 11, 12, 19–20,
associative, 12 55, 57, 71–76, 81, 84, 96, 102, 105, 123,
asymptotic series, 299 135, 137, 152, 160, 181–185, 218, 220,
237–242, 248–249, 252, 298
Babbage, Charles, 54 Cauchy criterion
Baire, René Louis, 268 for integrability, 240, 249

317
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

318 Index

Cauchy criterion (theorem 4.2), 123, 129, 208, binomial series, 146
210 Cauchy criterion, 123, 129, 208
Cauchy integral, 238 comparison test, 130
Cauchy sequence, 123 condensation test, 135
Cauchy series, 123 conditional, 126
Cauchy’s condensation test (theorem 4.11), 135 d’Alembert’s definition, 128
Cauchy’s remainder theorem (theorem 3.11), Dirichlet’s test, 164
107 Gauss’s test, 152
characteristic function, 268 improper integral, 138
Charles X, 57 in norm, 145
Collins, John, 39 infinite series, 117
commutative, 12 integral test, 137
comparison test (theorem 4.6), 130 limit ratio test, 131
completeness, 125 limit root test, 132
completeness (theorem 4.3), 125 of binomial series, 153
condensation test, 135 of exponential series, 146
conditional convergence, 126, 177 of Fourier series, 158
conditions for Riemann integrability p-test, 137
(theorem 6.10), 251 pointwise, 145
continued fractions, 83 radius of, 147
continuity, 81 ratio test, 130
and boundedness, 95 root test, 132
and differentiability, 91, 258 uniform, 185, 188, 197, 203, 208, 254, 259
and integrability, 241, 268 converse, 122
Lacroix’s definition, 78 cosine
of composition, 90 series expansion, 44
of power series, 205 covering, 268
of product, 89 C p function, 54
of reciprocal, 89
of sum, 88 d’Alembert, Jean Le Rond, 41–43, 52, 53, 122,
on an interval, 81 128, 129, 248
piecewise, 227 Darboux’s theorem (theorem 3.14), 112
uniform, 228 Darboux, Jean Gaston, 111
continuity and uniform convergence implies decreasing function, 87
convergence at endpoints (theorem 5.14), Dedekind, Julius Wilhelm Richard, 84, 175
208 definite integral, 219
continuity of infinite series (theorem 5.6), 187 de Moivre, Abraham, 40, 271, 293–296
continuity of integral (corollary 6.8), 243 derivative
continuous implies bounded (theorem 3.6), 95 and continuity, 91, 258
continuous implies bounds achieved Lagrange’s definition, 54, 55
(theorem 3.8), 98 of infinite series, 63–65, 195
continuous implies integrable (theorem 6.6), 241 of power series, 205
continuous on [a, b] implies uniform continuity one-sided, 92
(lemma 6.3), 229 Diderot, Denis, 41, 52
contrapositive, 122 differentiable implies continuous (theorem 3.5),
convergence 91
absolute, 125, 149, 175, 220, 248 differentiation
alternating series, 126 of series, 6
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

Index 319

Dijksterhuis, E. J., 11 floor, 30

dilogarithm, 187 Fourier, Jean Baptiste Joseph, 1–7, 22, 43, 53,
Dirichlet, Peter Gustav Lejeune, x–xi, 7, 82, 88, 54, 160, 161, 171, 197, 199, 217–220, 222,
160–161, 163, 174, 175, 182, 203, 248, 267
217–227, 248, 267, 269, 270, 282 Fourier series, 5–7, 63, 145, 166, 171, 182, 191,
Dirichlet kernel, 223 197, 199, 218, 248, 269
Dirichlet’s test (corollary 4.17), 164, 166 convergence, 158, 217
Dirichlet’s test for uniform convergence Dirichlet’s test, 164
(theorem 5.16), 211 Dirichlet’s theorem, 227
Dirichlet’s theorem (theorem 6.1), 227 uniform convergence, 210
discontinuity, 84 uniqueness, 267
distributive law for series (theorem 5.5), 179 frequency, 53
divergence, 18, 52–53, 149
comparison test, 130 γ , see Euler’s constant
condensation test, 135 Gauss, Carl Friedrich, x, 57, 149, 151, 152, 174
d’Alembert’s definition, 128 Gauss’s test (theorem 4.15), 152, 187
Gauss’s test, 152 generalized mean value theorem (theorem 3.2),
integral test, 137 75
limit ratio test, 131 geometric series, 17
limit root test, 132 Germain, Sophie, 217, 282
of binomial series, 153 Gilbert, Phillipe, 259
p-test, 137 Grattan-Guinness, Ivor, 18
ratio test, 130 greatest lower bound, 97
root test, 132 Gregory, James, 23, 35, 39, 40
divergence theorem (theorem 4.1), 122 Gudermann, Christof, 203
divergence to infinity, 29
dominated uniform convergence (theorem 5.9), Hachette, Jean Nicholas Pierre, 160
203 Hadamard, Jacques, 270
Hankel, Hermann, 259, 267
Eisenstein, Ferdinand Gotthold Max, 174 Hardy, Godfrey Harold, 259
envelope, 185 harmonic series, 121, 284
–δ, 61 partial sums, 33
Euclid, 73 harmonics, 53
Eudoxus of Cnidus, 11 Hawkins, Thomas, 259n
Euler, Leonhard, ix, 4, 17–18, 31, 38, 39, 43, Heine, Heinrich Eduard, 84, 267
52–54, 138, 150, 151, 172, 248, 271, 282, Hermite, Charles, 269
284–289, 296 Herschel, John, 54
Euler’s constant, 31 Hoüel, Guillaume Jules, 259
Euler–Maclaurin formula (theorem A.1), 139, Holmboe, Bernt Michael, 160
296, 298 hypergeometric series, 150
existence of radius of convergence Gauss’s test for convergence, 152
(theorem 4.14), 149
exponential function ibn Al-Haytham, 278
series expansion, 44 improper integral, 252
unbounded domain, 138
Fermat, Pierre de, 99, 272, 282 value, 138
Fermat’s last theorem, 160, 270, 282–283 increasing function, 87
Fermat’s theorem on extrema (theorem 3.9), 100 infimum, 97
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

320 Index

infinite limit, 109 least upper bound, 97, 210

infinite series, 9, 171 Lebesgue, Henri Léon, 1, 220, 263, 268
addition of two series, 178 Lebesgue integral, 268–269
alternating, 126 Legendre, Adrien Marie, 160, 270, 282
differentiation, 63–65, 195 Leibniz, Gottfried, 23, 24, 40, 50, 99, 172
divergent, 18, 52–53 Levi ben Gerson, 278
integration, 197 L’Hospital, Guillaume François Antoine de, 109
multiplication by constant, 179 L’Hospital’s rule
of continuous functions, 182, 187 0/0 (theorem 3.12), 109
rearranging, 13, 175, 177, 220 ∞/∞ (theorem 3.13), 110
regrouping, 13, 173 L’Huillier, Simon Antoine Jean, 52
infinite summation, see infinite series lim inf, 148
integral lim sup, 148
as an area, 219 limit
as inverse of derivative, 219 at infinity, 109
Cauchy, 238 d’Alembert’s definition, 52
with Cauchy criterion, 240 from the left, 92
definite, 219 from the right, 92
improper, 138 infinite, 109
Lebesgue, 268, 269 interchanging, 171
of infinite series, 197 lower, 148
of power series, 205 one-sided, 92
Riemann, 249, 267 upper, 148
necessary and sufficient conditions for limit ratio test (corollary 4.8), 131
existence, 251 limit root test (corollary 4.10), 132
with Cauchy criterion, 249 Liouville, Joseph, 217
integral form of the mean value theorem logarithm
(theorem 6.7), 243 series expansion, 28
integral of Dirichlet kernel (lemma 6.4), 231 lower limit, 148
integral test (theorem 4.13), 137
integration Machin, John, 23
of series, 5 Maclaurin, Colin, 138, 296
intermediate value property, 73, 78, 79, 85 Madhava, 23
intermediate value theorem (theorem 3.3), 85 mean value theorem
inverse, 122 Bonnet’s, 231, 233, 244
Bonnet’s proof, 72, 74, 102
Jacobi, Carl Gustav Jacob, 174 Cauchy’s first proof, 72–73
Cauchy’s second proof, 75, 77
Kepler, Johann, 99 generalized, 75
Kummer, Ernst Eduard, 283 integral form, 243
mean value theorem (theorem 3.1), 58, 72–77
Lacroix, Sylvestre François, 4, 78, 161 measure, 263, 268
Lagrange, Joseph Louis, ix, 4, 6, 43, 53, 54, 57, Medvedev, Fyodor A., 259n
166, 217, 248 Meray, Charles, 84
Lagrange remainder, 43–47 Mercator, Nicolaus, 28
Lagrange’s remainder theorem (theorem 2.1), 44 method of exhaustion, 11
Lamé, Gabriel, 283 modified converse to intermediate value theorem
Laplace, Pierre Simon, 4, 57, 161 (theorem 3.4), 87
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

Index 321

Monge, Gaspard, 4 rational function, 38

monotonic function, 87 rearranging convergent series (theorem 5.2),
175
Napoléon I, 217 rearranging infinite series, 13, 175, 177, 220
Narayana Pandita, 278 refinement, 239
Navier, Claude Louis Marie Henry, 217 regrouping infinite series (theorem 5.1), 13,
nested interval principle, 32 173
Newton, Isaac, 23–26, 28, 40, 50, 99, 271 regular prime, 283
Nilakantha, 23 Riemann, Georg Friedrich Bernhard, xi, 4, 58,
174–175, 220, 228, 248–255, 258, 267,
Olsen, Lars, 111 269, 270, 289
one-sided derivative, 92 Riemann hypothesis, 290
one-sided limit, 92 Riemann integral, 249, 267
Oresme, Nicole, 17 necessary and sufficient conditions for
existence, 251
p-test (corollary 4.12), 137 Riemann rearrangement theorem (theorem 5.3),
Peacock, George, 54 177
π Riemann’s lemma (lemma 6.2), 228, 242
calculations of, 22–26 Rolle, Michel, 100
Wallis’s formula for, 24 Rolle’s theorem (theorem 3.10), 100
piecewise continuous, 227 root test (theorem 4.9), 132
piecewise monotonic, 87, 227, 262 Russell, Bertrand Arthur William, 1
Poincaré, Henri, ix, 269
pointwise convergence, 145 Saigey, Jacques Fréderic, 160
Poisson, Siméon Denis, 4, 161, 217, Seidel, Phillip, 182
220 series, see infinite series
power series, 39, 145, 204–205 Serret, Joseph Alfred, 72, 102
binomial, see binomial series sine
continuity, 205 series expansion, 44
differentiation, 205 Steiner, Jakob, 174
expansion of e−1/x , 68
2
Stieltjes, Thomas Jan, 269
hypergeometric, see hypergeometric series Stirling, James, 271, 293–296
integration, 205 Stirling’s formula, 45, 118, 133, 146, 271,
uniform convergence, 204, 209 293–298
primes Stirling’s series, 118
counting function, 270, 289 Stokes, George, 182
in arithmetic progression, 270 Sturm, Charles François, 217
Pythagorean triples, 282 supremum, 97
Swineshead, Richard, 17
Q.E.D., 73 Sylvester, James Joseph, 41n
quadrature of the parabola, 9
Taylor series, 40
Raabe, Joseph Ludwig, 152, 258 Cauchy remainder, 107–109
radius of convergence, 147 Lagrange remainder, 43–47, 71, 105–109
existence of, 149 Taylor, Brook, 40
for complex-valued power series, 169 Taylor, Richard, 270, 283
Ramanujan, S., 26 term-by-term differentiation (theorem 5.7), 6,
ratio test (theorem 4.7), 130, 151 195
P1: kpb
book3 MAAB001/Bressoud October 20, 2006 4:18

322 Index

term-by-term integration (theorem 5.8), 5, 197 Vallée Poussin, Charles de la,

trigonometric series, 145, 218, 254 270
variation, 250
uniform continuity, 228 variation on dominated uniform convergence
uniform convergence, 185, 188, 197, 203, 208, (corollary 5.11), 204
254, 259, 267 vibrating string problem, 4, 53–54
Cauchy criterion, 202
Dirichlet’s test, 211 Wallis, John, 23, 271–275
in general, 267 Wallis’s formula, 24, 275, 296
of power series, 209 Weierstrass, Karl Theodor Wilhelm, xi, 4, 58,
Weierstrass M-test, 203, 204 91, 182, 203, 258–263, 267
uniform convergence of power series, I Weierstrass M-test (corollary 5.12), 203, 204,
(corollary 5.13), 204 259
uniform convergence of power series, II Whitehead, Alfred North, 1
(theorem 5.15), 209 Wiles, Andrew, 270, 283
uniformly bounded, 210
upper bound implies least upper bound ζ , see zeta function
(theorem 3.7), 98 zeta function, 36, 289
upper limit, 148 Zhu Shijie, 278
AMS / MAA TEXTBOOKS

In this second edition of the MAA classic, exploration continues to be an

essential component. More than 60 new exercises have been added, and
the chapters on Infinite Summations, Differentiability and Continuity, and
Convergence of Infinite Series have been reorganized to make it easier to
identify the key ideas.
A Radical Approach to Real Analysis is an introduction to real analysis,
rooted in and informed by the historical issues that shaped its develop-
ment. It can be used as a textbook, as a resource for the instructor who
prefers to teach a traditional course, or as a resource for the student who
has been through a traditional course yet still does not understand what
real analysis is about and why it was created.
The book begins with Fourier’s introduction of trigonometric series
and the problems they created for the mathematicians of the early 19th
century. It follows Cauchy’s attempts to establish a firm foundation for
calculus and considers his failures as well as his successes. It culminates
with Dirichlet’s proof of the validity of the Fourier series expansion and
explores some of the counterintuitive results Riemann and Weierstrass
were led to as a result of Dirichlet’s proof.