Why does $f(x) = sum_n=1^infty(1/(x^mathrmprime(n))$ have a local maximum?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
2
down vote

favorite
1












We played around with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_constant this equation a bit and got to this by playing:



$ y = f(x) =
sum_n=1^inftyfrac1x^mathrmprime(n)$



where $mathrmprime(n)$ returns the $n$th prime.



To this formular, we've got 2 questions. First, when doing it with x = 10, we seemingly get it in binary format directly instead of the need to convert it first (what the equation on wikipedia with x = 2 needs). But we haven't been able to convert to any other bases. So, why do 2 and 10 work, but 3 isn't convertable to any other base? (Seemingly! We're far from being experts on floating point numbers and conversion!).



Also, maybe even more interesting, When plotting this up to, say, 100 000, we saw that it has a local maximum in the negative somewhere around between the $x$ values -2,19 and -2,185.



The questions we wondered about:



  • Why does base-conversion only work between $x = 2$ and $x = 10$?

  • Why does this maximum occur? We don't see the reason for this.

  • Where exactly is the local maximum (the local maximum around $x=-2.19$ that is) and how to calculcate that? Is it somehow deducible from other known mathematical constants? (Like, say, $fracpi2$ or something like that).

  • Does this local maximum occur if we put $n = infty$? We can only play around with numbers and not proof that kind of stuff here since we don't know how to handle the prime-function.

When plotting this function, we first thought we made an error, but WolframAlpha ( https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=f(x)+%3D+sum+x%5E-Prime%5Bn%5D,+n%3D1+to+10 ) seems to plot roughly the same maximum (of course, with smaller $n$-vaues in the example link).







share|cite|improve this question


























    up vote
    2
    down vote

    favorite
    1












    We played around with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_constant this equation a bit and got to this by playing:



    $ y = f(x) =
    sum_n=1^inftyfrac1x^mathrmprime(n)$



    where $mathrmprime(n)$ returns the $n$th prime.



    To this formular, we've got 2 questions. First, when doing it with x = 10, we seemingly get it in binary format directly instead of the need to convert it first (what the equation on wikipedia with x = 2 needs). But we haven't been able to convert to any other bases. So, why do 2 and 10 work, but 3 isn't convertable to any other base? (Seemingly! We're far from being experts on floating point numbers and conversion!).



    Also, maybe even more interesting, When plotting this up to, say, 100 000, we saw that it has a local maximum in the negative somewhere around between the $x$ values -2,19 and -2,185.



    The questions we wondered about:



    • Why does base-conversion only work between $x = 2$ and $x = 10$?

    • Why does this maximum occur? We don't see the reason for this.

    • Where exactly is the local maximum (the local maximum around $x=-2.19$ that is) and how to calculcate that? Is it somehow deducible from other known mathematical constants? (Like, say, $fracpi2$ or something like that).

    • Does this local maximum occur if we put $n = infty$? We can only play around with numbers and not proof that kind of stuff here since we don't know how to handle the prime-function.

    When plotting this function, we first thought we made an error, but WolframAlpha ( https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=f(x)+%3D+sum+x%5E-Prime%5Bn%5D,+n%3D1+to+10 ) seems to plot roughly the same maximum (of course, with smaller $n$-vaues in the example link).







    share|cite|improve this question
























      up vote
      2
      down vote

      favorite
      1









      up vote
      2
      down vote

      favorite
      1






      1





      We played around with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_constant this equation a bit and got to this by playing:



      $ y = f(x) =
      sum_n=1^inftyfrac1x^mathrmprime(n)$



      where $mathrmprime(n)$ returns the $n$th prime.



      To this formular, we've got 2 questions. First, when doing it with x = 10, we seemingly get it in binary format directly instead of the need to convert it first (what the equation on wikipedia with x = 2 needs). But we haven't been able to convert to any other bases. So, why do 2 and 10 work, but 3 isn't convertable to any other base? (Seemingly! We're far from being experts on floating point numbers and conversion!).



      Also, maybe even more interesting, When plotting this up to, say, 100 000, we saw that it has a local maximum in the negative somewhere around between the $x$ values -2,19 and -2,185.



      The questions we wondered about:



      • Why does base-conversion only work between $x = 2$ and $x = 10$?

      • Why does this maximum occur? We don't see the reason for this.

      • Where exactly is the local maximum (the local maximum around $x=-2.19$ that is) and how to calculcate that? Is it somehow deducible from other known mathematical constants? (Like, say, $fracpi2$ or something like that).

      • Does this local maximum occur if we put $n = infty$? We can only play around with numbers and not proof that kind of stuff here since we don't know how to handle the prime-function.

      When plotting this function, we first thought we made an error, but WolframAlpha ( https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=f(x)+%3D+sum+x%5E-Prime%5Bn%5D,+n%3D1+to+10 ) seems to plot roughly the same maximum (of course, with smaller $n$-vaues in the example link).







      share|cite|improve this question














      We played around with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_constant this equation a bit and got to this by playing:



      $ y = f(x) =
      sum_n=1^inftyfrac1x^mathrmprime(n)$



      where $mathrmprime(n)$ returns the $n$th prime.



      To this formular, we've got 2 questions. First, when doing it with x = 10, we seemingly get it in binary format directly instead of the need to convert it first (what the equation on wikipedia with x = 2 needs). But we haven't been able to convert to any other bases. So, why do 2 and 10 work, but 3 isn't convertable to any other base? (Seemingly! We're far from being experts on floating point numbers and conversion!).



      Also, maybe even more interesting, When plotting this up to, say, 100 000, we saw that it has a local maximum in the negative somewhere around between the $x$ values -2,19 and -2,185.



      The questions we wondered about:



      • Why does base-conversion only work between $x = 2$ and $x = 10$?

      • Why does this maximum occur? We don't see the reason for this.

      • Where exactly is the local maximum (the local maximum around $x=-2.19$ that is) and how to calculcate that? Is it somehow deducible from other known mathematical constants? (Like, say, $fracpi2$ or something like that).

      • Does this local maximum occur if we put $n = infty$? We can only play around with numbers and not proof that kind of stuff here since we don't know how to handle the prime-function.

      When plotting this function, we first thought we made an error, but WolframAlpha ( https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=f(x)+%3D+sum+x%5E-Prime%5Bn%5D,+n%3D1+to+10 ) seems to plot roughly the same maximum (of course, with smaller $n$-vaues in the example link).









      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Aug 9 at 22:31









      Mike

      1,777110




      1,777110










      asked Aug 9 at 18:56









      Max Mustermann Junior

      142




      142




















          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          4
          down vote













          $f(10) = 1/10^2 + 1/10^3 + 1/10^5 + ldots = 0.01101ldots$. Each term $1/10^p$ corresponds to a digit $1$ in the decimal expansion of this number, the rest of the digits being $0$. It may look like "binary format" to you, but it's just decimal where the digits are $0$'s and $1$'s.



          EDIT:
          $$f'(x) = - sum_n=1^infty textprime(n) x^-textprime(n)-1$$
          Note that when $x < 0$, $x^-textprime(n)$ is positive for $n=1$
          and negative otherwise. We have $f'(-2.19) approx 0.00029987$ and $f'(-2.185) approx -0.00049086$, so there will be a local max somewhere between those. It won't have a closed form.






          share|cite|improve this answer





























            up vote
            1
            down vote













            When x is negative, the only positive term is $1/x^2$ because that is the only even prime.

            That term dominates all the others when $x$ is large and negative. As $x$ shrinks, $1/x^2$ grows bigger, and you see the sum increase. But the negative terms also grow, and somewhere $1/x^2$ no longer dominates. By the time $x=-1$, the sum is $1-1-1-1-1...$ and the negative terms dominate The tipping point seems to be $-2. 19$.

            I can't see a way to calculate that number.






            share|cite|improve this answer



























              up vote
              0
              down vote













              As Robert pointed out, you can find the local maxima around $x=-2.19$ by differentiating $f$. Concerning the values of your function $f$ at positive integers $x$, these correspond to the base-$x$ representations of the prime constant.



              Let $chi_mathbbP$ denote the characteristic function of the primes, i.e., the function such that for positive integer $n$:



              $$
              displaystyle chi_mathbbP(n):=begincases1&textif nin mathbbP,\0&textif nnotin mathbbP,endcases
              $$



              where $mathbbP$ denotes the set of prime numbers. Now let $rho$ denote the prime constant. We have:



              $$
              rho =sum _pfrac 12^p=sum _n=1^infty frac chi _mathbb P(n)2^n=f(2).
              $$



              By letting $rho_x$ denote the base-$x$ representation of the prime constant, we have:



              $$
              rho_x =sum _pfrac 1x^p=sum _n=1^infty frac chi _mathbb P(n)x^n=f(x).
              $$



              The decimal expansion of $rho$ begins with:
              beginalign
              rho&=0.011010100010100010_2\
              &=0.414682509851111660248109622ldots .
              endalign



              and is included in the OEIS as sequence A051006. Other values, for instance $x=3$ can be easily computed:



              beginalign
              f(3)=sum _pfrac 13^p&=rho_3 \
              &=0.011010100010100010_3 \
              &=0.152726266ldots.
              endalign






              share|cite|improve this answer




















                Your Answer




                StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
                return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
                StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
                StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
                );
                );
                , "mathjax-editing");

                StackExchange.ready(function()
                var channelOptions =
                tags: "".split(" "),
                id: "69"
                ;
                initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

                StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
                // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
                if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
                StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
                createEditor();
                );

                else
                createEditor();

                );

                function createEditor()
                StackExchange.prepareEditor(
                heartbeatType: 'answer',
                convertImagesToLinks: true,
                noModals: false,
                showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
                reputationToPostImages: 10,
                bindNavPrevention: true,
                postfix: "",
                noCode: true, onDemand: true,
                discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
                ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
                );



                );








                 

                draft saved


                draft discarded


















                StackExchange.ready(
                function ()
                StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2877582%2fwhy-does-fx-sum-n-1-infty1-x-mathrmprimen-have-a-local-max%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                );

                Post as a guest






























                3 Answers
                3






                active

                oldest

                votes








                3 Answers
                3






                active

                oldest

                votes









                active

                oldest

                votes






                active

                oldest

                votes








                up vote
                4
                down vote













                $f(10) = 1/10^2 + 1/10^3 + 1/10^5 + ldots = 0.01101ldots$. Each term $1/10^p$ corresponds to a digit $1$ in the decimal expansion of this number, the rest of the digits being $0$. It may look like "binary format" to you, but it's just decimal where the digits are $0$'s and $1$'s.



                EDIT:
                $$f'(x) = - sum_n=1^infty textprime(n) x^-textprime(n)-1$$
                Note that when $x < 0$, $x^-textprime(n)$ is positive for $n=1$
                and negative otherwise. We have $f'(-2.19) approx 0.00029987$ and $f'(-2.185) approx -0.00049086$, so there will be a local max somewhere between those. It won't have a closed form.






                share|cite|improve this answer


























                  up vote
                  4
                  down vote













                  $f(10) = 1/10^2 + 1/10^3 + 1/10^5 + ldots = 0.01101ldots$. Each term $1/10^p$ corresponds to a digit $1$ in the decimal expansion of this number, the rest of the digits being $0$. It may look like "binary format" to you, but it's just decimal where the digits are $0$'s and $1$'s.



                  EDIT:
                  $$f'(x) = - sum_n=1^infty textprime(n) x^-textprime(n)-1$$
                  Note that when $x < 0$, $x^-textprime(n)$ is positive for $n=1$
                  and negative otherwise. We have $f'(-2.19) approx 0.00029987$ and $f'(-2.185) approx -0.00049086$, so there will be a local max somewhere between those. It won't have a closed form.






                  share|cite|improve this answer
























                    up vote
                    4
                    down vote










                    up vote
                    4
                    down vote









                    $f(10) = 1/10^2 + 1/10^3 + 1/10^5 + ldots = 0.01101ldots$. Each term $1/10^p$ corresponds to a digit $1$ in the decimal expansion of this number, the rest of the digits being $0$. It may look like "binary format" to you, but it's just decimal where the digits are $0$'s and $1$'s.



                    EDIT:
                    $$f'(x) = - sum_n=1^infty textprime(n) x^-textprime(n)-1$$
                    Note that when $x < 0$, $x^-textprime(n)$ is positive for $n=1$
                    and negative otherwise. We have $f'(-2.19) approx 0.00029987$ and $f'(-2.185) approx -0.00049086$, so there will be a local max somewhere between those. It won't have a closed form.






                    share|cite|improve this answer














                    $f(10) = 1/10^2 + 1/10^3 + 1/10^5 + ldots = 0.01101ldots$. Each term $1/10^p$ corresponds to a digit $1$ in the decimal expansion of this number, the rest of the digits being $0$. It may look like "binary format" to you, but it's just decimal where the digits are $0$'s and $1$'s.



                    EDIT:
                    $$f'(x) = - sum_n=1^infty textprime(n) x^-textprime(n)-1$$
                    Note that when $x < 0$, $x^-textprime(n)$ is positive for $n=1$
                    and negative otherwise. We have $f'(-2.19) approx 0.00029987$ and $f'(-2.185) approx -0.00049086$, so there will be a local max somewhere between those. It won't have a closed form.







                    share|cite|improve this answer














                    share|cite|improve this answer



                    share|cite|improve this answer








                    edited Aug 9 at 19:19

























                    answered Aug 9 at 19:07









                    Robert Israel

                    304k22201443




                    304k22201443




















                        up vote
                        1
                        down vote













                        When x is negative, the only positive term is $1/x^2$ because that is the only even prime.

                        That term dominates all the others when $x$ is large and negative. As $x$ shrinks, $1/x^2$ grows bigger, and you see the sum increase. But the negative terms also grow, and somewhere $1/x^2$ no longer dominates. By the time $x=-1$, the sum is $1-1-1-1-1...$ and the negative terms dominate The tipping point seems to be $-2. 19$.

                        I can't see a way to calculate that number.






                        share|cite|improve this answer
























                          up vote
                          1
                          down vote













                          When x is negative, the only positive term is $1/x^2$ because that is the only even prime.

                          That term dominates all the others when $x$ is large and negative. As $x$ shrinks, $1/x^2$ grows bigger, and you see the sum increase. But the negative terms also grow, and somewhere $1/x^2$ no longer dominates. By the time $x=-1$, the sum is $1-1-1-1-1...$ and the negative terms dominate The tipping point seems to be $-2. 19$.

                          I can't see a way to calculate that number.






                          share|cite|improve this answer






















                            up vote
                            1
                            down vote










                            up vote
                            1
                            down vote









                            When x is negative, the only positive term is $1/x^2$ because that is the only even prime.

                            That term dominates all the others when $x$ is large and negative. As $x$ shrinks, $1/x^2$ grows bigger, and you see the sum increase. But the negative terms also grow, and somewhere $1/x^2$ no longer dominates. By the time $x=-1$, the sum is $1-1-1-1-1...$ and the negative terms dominate The tipping point seems to be $-2. 19$.

                            I can't see a way to calculate that number.






                            share|cite|improve this answer












                            When x is negative, the only positive term is $1/x^2$ because that is the only even prime.

                            That term dominates all the others when $x$ is large and negative. As $x$ shrinks, $1/x^2$ grows bigger, and you see the sum increase. But the negative terms also grow, and somewhere $1/x^2$ no longer dominates. By the time $x=-1$, the sum is $1-1-1-1-1...$ and the negative terms dominate The tipping point seems to be $-2. 19$.

                            I can't see a way to calculate that number.







                            share|cite|improve this answer












                            share|cite|improve this answer



                            share|cite|improve this answer










                            answered Aug 9 at 19:28









                            Empy2

                            31.9k12059




                            31.9k12059




















                                up vote
                                0
                                down vote













                                As Robert pointed out, you can find the local maxima around $x=-2.19$ by differentiating $f$. Concerning the values of your function $f$ at positive integers $x$, these correspond to the base-$x$ representations of the prime constant.



                                Let $chi_mathbbP$ denote the characteristic function of the primes, i.e., the function such that for positive integer $n$:



                                $$
                                displaystyle chi_mathbbP(n):=begincases1&textif nin mathbbP,\0&textif nnotin mathbbP,endcases
                                $$



                                where $mathbbP$ denotes the set of prime numbers. Now let $rho$ denote the prime constant. We have:



                                $$
                                rho =sum _pfrac 12^p=sum _n=1^infty frac chi _mathbb P(n)2^n=f(2).
                                $$



                                By letting $rho_x$ denote the base-$x$ representation of the prime constant, we have:



                                $$
                                rho_x =sum _pfrac 1x^p=sum _n=1^infty frac chi _mathbb P(n)x^n=f(x).
                                $$



                                The decimal expansion of $rho$ begins with:
                                beginalign
                                rho&=0.011010100010100010_2\
                                &=0.414682509851111660248109622ldots .
                                endalign



                                and is included in the OEIS as sequence A051006. Other values, for instance $x=3$ can be easily computed:



                                beginalign
                                f(3)=sum _pfrac 13^p&=rho_3 \
                                &=0.011010100010100010_3 \
                                &=0.152726266ldots.
                                endalign






                                share|cite|improve this answer
























                                  up vote
                                  0
                                  down vote













                                  As Robert pointed out, you can find the local maxima around $x=-2.19$ by differentiating $f$. Concerning the values of your function $f$ at positive integers $x$, these correspond to the base-$x$ representations of the prime constant.



                                  Let $chi_mathbbP$ denote the characteristic function of the primes, i.e., the function such that for positive integer $n$:



                                  $$
                                  displaystyle chi_mathbbP(n):=begincases1&textif nin mathbbP,\0&textif nnotin mathbbP,endcases
                                  $$



                                  where $mathbbP$ denotes the set of prime numbers. Now let $rho$ denote the prime constant. We have:



                                  $$
                                  rho =sum _pfrac 12^p=sum _n=1^infty frac chi _mathbb P(n)2^n=f(2).
                                  $$



                                  By letting $rho_x$ denote the base-$x$ representation of the prime constant, we have:



                                  $$
                                  rho_x =sum _pfrac 1x^p=sum _n=1^infty frac chi _mathbb P(n)x^n=f(x).
                                  $$



                                  The decimal expansion of $rho$ begins with:
                                  beginalign
                                  rho&=0.011010100010100010_2\
                                  &=0.414682509851111660248109622ldots .
                                  endalign



                                  and is included in the OEIS as sequence A051006. Other values, for instance $x=3$ can be easily computed:



                                  beginalign
                                  f(3)=sum _pfrac 13^p&=rho_3 \
                                  &=0.011010100010100010_3 \
                                  &=0.152726266ldots.
                                  endalign






                                  share|cite|improve this answer






















                                    up vote
                                    0
                                    down vote










                                    up vote
                                    0
                                    down vote









                                    As Robert pointed out, you can find the local maxima around $x=-2.19$ by differentiating $f$. Concerning the values of your function $f$ at positive integers $x$, these correspond to the base-$x$ representations of the prime constant.



                                    Let $chi_mathbbP$ denote the characteristic function of the primes, i.e., the function such that for positive integer $n$:



                                    $$
                                    displaystyle chi_mathbbP(n):=begincases1&textif nin mathbbP,\0&textif nnotin mathbbP,endcases
                                    $$



                                    where $mathbbP$ denotes the set of prime numbers. Now let $rho$ denote the prime constant. We have:



                                    $$
                                    rho =sum _pfrac 12^p=sum _n=1^infty frac chi _mathbb P(n)2^n=f(2).
                                    $$



                                    By letting $rho_x$ denote the base-$x$ representation of the prime constant, we have:



                                    $$
                                    rho_x =sum _pfrac 1x^p=sum _n=1^infty frac chi _mathbb P(n)x^n=f(x).
                                    $$



                                    The decimal expansion of $rho$ begins with:
                                    beginalign
                                    rho&=0.011010100010100010_2\
                                    &=0.414682509851111660248109622ldots .
                                    endalign



                                    and is included in the OEIS as sequence A051006. Other values, for instance $x=3$ can be easily computed:



                                    beginalign
                                    f(3)=sum _pfrac 13^p&=rho_3 \
                                    &=0.011010100010100010_3 \
                                    &=0.152726266ldots.
                                    endalign






                                    share|cite|improve this answer












                                    As Robert pointed out, you can find the local maxima around $x=-2.19$ by differentiating $f$. Concerning the values of your function $f$ at positive integers $x$, these correspond to the base-$x$ representations of the prime constant.



                                    Let $chi_mathbbP$ denote the characteristic function of the primes, i.e., the function such that for positive integer $n$:



                                    $$
                                    displaystyle chi_mathbbP(n):=begincases1&textif nin mathbbP,\0&textif nnotin mathbbP,endcases
                                    $$



                                    where $mathbbP$ denotes the set of prime numbers. Now let $rho$ denote the prime constant. We have:



                                    $$
                                    rho =sum _pfrac 12^p=sum _n=1^infty frac chi _mathbb P(n)2^n=f(2).
                                    $$



                                    By letting $rho_x$ denote the base-$x$ representation of the prime constant, we have:



                                    $$
                                    rho_x =sum _pfrac 1x^p=sum _n=1^infty frac chi _mathbb P(n)x^n=f(x).
                                    $$



                                    The decimal expansion of $rho$ begins with:
                                    beginalign
                                    rho&=0.011010100010100010_2\
                                    &=0.414682509851111660248109622ldots .
                                    endalign



                                    and is included in the OEIS as sequence A051006. Other values, for instance $x=3$ can be easily computed:



                                    beginalign
                                    f(3)=sum _pfrac 13^p&=rho_3 \
                                    &=0.011010100010100010_3 \
                                    &=0.152726266ldots.
                                    endalign







                                    share|cite|improve this answer












                                    share|cite|improve this answer



                                    share|cite|improve this answer










                                    answered 14 hours ago









                                    PreservedFruit

                                    1,3771926




                                    1,3771926






















                                         

                                        draft saved


                                        draft discarded


























                                         


                                        draft saved


                                        draft discarded














                                        StackExchange.ready(
                                        function ()
                                        StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2877582%2fwhy-does-fx-sum-n-1-infty1-x-mathrmprimen-have-a-local-max%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                                        );

                                        Post as a guest













































































                                        這個網誌中的熱門文章

                                        Is there any way to eliminate the singular point to solve this integral by hand or by approximations?

                                        Why am i infinitely getting the same tweet with the Twitter Search API?

                                        Carbon dioxide