A nicer form for $sum_r=1^msum_d(-1)^r+d d^3$?

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











up vote
7
down vote

favorite












Specific Question



Let $R$ be a whole number. Is it possible for any whole number $c>0$ that there is a nicer form for $sum_r=1^R^csum_r(-1)^r+d d^3$? I can hope that we can just evaluate this sum but in lieu of that maybe something cheaper computationally. Taking $c=1$ we can examine:
$$f(x)=sum_r=1^xsum_r(-1)^r+d d^3$$
Here is a table of the first 100 values of this function $f$. This function must grow $O(x^4)$ for reasons which should be clear after reading the exposition. TLDR: $f(x)/x^4$ limits to $fracpi^4384$ as $x$ gets large.



Exposition.



Let $phi_n(r)$ denote the number of integer solutions to the $n$-dimensional hypersphere $r=sum_i=1^n x_i^2$.



Then discovering $phi_2(r)=4 sum_r sin(fracpi2d)$ allows us to find a formula for $pi$. Namely, Leibniz's formula for $pi$. Considering that the sum of number of integer solutions for each $r$ from $1$ to $R^2$ should approximate the volume of a sphere (which for this special case $n=2$ goes by the special name 'circle') with radius $R$ we arrive at:



$$pi R^2 approxsum_r=1^R^2phi_2(r)$$ and after dividing both sides by $4R^2$ and unpacking our definitions we arrive $$fracpi4=lim_Rtoinfty frac1R^2sum_r=1^R^2sum_rsin Big(fracpi2d Big)$$
$$=sum_n=1^inftyfrac1nsinBig(fracpi2d Big)$$



So now that we've seen the development for a $2$-dimensional sphere what's the development for 8-dimensional sphere? Note that the $phi_8(r)= 16sum_r (-1)^r+dd^3$ which gives a way of approximate the volume of an $8$-dimensional hypersphere:



$$frac124pi^4 R^8 approx sum_r=1^R^2phi_8(r)$$



We divide both sides by $16R^8$ to arrive at



$$fracpi^4384= lim_Rtoinfty frac1R^8sum_r=1^R^2 sum_r (-1)^r+dd^3$$



In fact! It looks to me like for any whole number $c$,



$$fracpi^4384= lim_Rtoinfty frac1R^4csum_r=1^R^c sum_r (-1)^r+dd^3$$



This does provide a nice sequence which converges to $pi^4/384$. Letting $c=1$ this sequence's rate of convergence is pretty atrocious.



$$1,frac816,frac3681,frac107256,frac233625,dots $$



The printed numbers are all accurate to ... zero decimal places... it should converge nonetheless.



but taking $c$ larger we arrive at this number much faster. For $c=2$,



$$1,frac107256,frac21136561,frac1912865536, dots $$



Only the last number printed is accurate to the first decimal of $pi^4/384$.



Can I see anything else here? Is there a closed form for this



$$sum_r=1^R^csum_r(-1)^r+d d^3$$



Sequences of interest include A008457, A138503. I think this link may be a good resource but (I am pretty sure) the "formula" therein should be labelled as a generating function A055414.



I suppose it's unlikely that the problem is easier $c>1$ but I figured I would include this thought just in case the problem is somehow solvable for some specific $c$.



A more general food for thought question
Does this development get me similar looking things for other dimensions $n$?







share|cite|improve this question






















  • You have a sum over r, but r does not appear in the summand?
    – herb steinberg
    Aug 11 at 0:34










  • Sorry about that 'circle' joke too. Unclear if you can hear my tongue and cheek humor over the internet.
    – Mason
    Aug 11 at 0:40










  • @herbsteinberg. I think I got them all.
    – Mason
    Aug 11 at 0:48










  • If anyone wanted to chime in about appropriate tags that would help too.
    – Mason
    Aug 11 at 0:55










  • Wouldn't plugging $sqrt[2]R^c$ into your formula proves your assertion? In fact it seems like the sum converges to $fracpi^4384$ for all real $cge 1$
    – cortek
    Aug 11 at 4:13















up vote
7
down vote

favorite












Specific Question



Let $R$ be a whole number. Is it possible for any whole number $c>0$ that there is a nicer form for $sum_r=1^R^csum_r(-1)^r+d d^3$? I can hope that we can just evaluate this sum but in lieu of that maybe something cheaper computationally. Taking $c=1$ we can examine:
$$f(x)=sum_r=1^xsum_r(-1)^r+d d^3$$
Here is a table of the first 100 values of this function $f$. This function must grow $O(x^4)$ for reasons which should be clear after reading the exposition. TLDR: $f(x)/x^4$ limits to $fracpi^4384$ as $x$ gets large.



Exposition.



Let $phi_n(r)$ denote the number of integer solutions to the $n$-dimensional hypersphere $r=sum_i=1^n x_i^2$.



Then discovering $phi_2(r)=4 sum_r sin(fracpi2d)$ allows us to find a formula for $pi$. Namely, Leibniz's formula for $pi$. Considering that the sum of number of integer solutions for each $r$ from $1$ to $R^2$ should approximate the volume of a sphere (which for this special case $n=2$ goes by the special name 'circle') with radius $R$ we arrive at:



$$pi R^2 approxsum_r=1^R^2phi_2(r)$$ and after dividing both sides by $4R^2$ and unpacking our definitions we arrive $$fracpi4=lim_Rtoinfty frac1R^2sum_r=1^R^2sum_rsin Big(fracpi2d Big)$$
$$=sum_n=1^inftyfrac1nsinBig(fracpi2d Big)$$



So now that we've seen the development for a $2$-dimensional sphere what's the development for 8-dimensional sphere? Note that the $phi_8(r)= 16sum_r (-1)^r+dd^3$ which gives a way of approximate the volume of an $8$-dimensional hypersphere:



$$frac124pi^4 R^8 approx sum_r=1^R^2phi_8(r)$$



We divide both sides by $16R^8$ to arrive at



$$fracpi^4384= lim_Rtoinfty frac1R^8sum_r=1^R^2 sum_r (-1)^r+dd^3$$



In fact! It looks to me like for any whole number $c$,



$$fracpi^4384= lim_Rtoinfty frac1R^4csum_r=1^R^c sum_r (-1)^r+dd^3$$



This does provide a nice sequence which converges to $pi^4/384$. Letting $c=1$ this sequence's rate of convergence is pretty atrocious.



$$1,frac816,frac3681,frac107256,frac233625,dots $$



The printed numbers are all accurate to ... zero decimal places... it should converge nonetheless.



but taking $c$ larger we arrive at this number much faster. For $c=2$,



$$1,frac107256,frac21136561,frac1912865536, dots $$



Only the last number printed is accurate to the first decimal of $pi^4/384$.



Can I see anything else here? Is there a closed form for this



$$sum_r=1^R^csum_r(-1)^r+d d^3$$



Sequences of interest include A008457, A138503. I think this link may be a good resource but (I am pretty sure) the "formula" therein should be labelled as a generating function A055414.



I suppose it's unlikely that the problem is easier $c>1$ but I figured I would include this thought just in case the problem is somehow solvable for some specific $c$.



A more general food for thought question
Does this development get me similar looking things for other dimensions $n$?







share|cite|improve this question






















  • You have a sum over r, but r does not appear in the summand?
    – herb steinberg
    Aug 11 at 0:34










  • Sorry about that 'circle' joke too. Unclear if you can hear my tongue and cheek humor over the internet.
    – Mason
    Aug 11 at 0:40










  • @herbsteinberg. I think I got them all.
    – Mason
    Aug 11 at 0:48










  • If anyone wanted to chime in about appropriate tags that would help too.
    – Mason
    Aug 11 at 0:55










  • Wouldn't plugging $sqrt[2]R^c$ into your formula proves your assertion? In fact it seems like the sum converges to $fracpi^4384$ for all real $cge 1$
    – cortek
    Aug 11 at 4:13













up vote
7
down vote

favorite









up vote
7
down vote

favorite











Specific Question



Let $R$ be a whole number. Is it possible for any whole number $c>0$ that there is a nicer form for $sum_r=1^R^csum_r(-1)^r+d d^3$? I can hope that we can just evaluate this sum but in lieu of that maybe something cheaper computationally. Taking $c=1$ we can examine:
$$f(x)=sum_r=1^xsum_r(-1)^r+d d^3$$
Here is a table of the first 100 values of this function $f$. This function must grow $O(x^4)$ for reasons which should be clear after reading the exposition. TLDR: $f(x)/x^4$ limits to $fracpi^4384$ as $x$ gets large.



Exposition.



Let $phi_n(r)$ denote the number of integer solutions to the $n$-dimensional hypersphere $r=sum_i=1^n x_i^2$.



Then discovering $phi_2(r)=4 sum_r sin(fracpi2d)$ allows us to find a formula for $pi$. Namely, Leibniz's formula for $pi$. Considering that the sum of number of integer solutions for each $r$ from $1$ to $R^2$ should approximate the volume of a sphere (which for this special case $n=2$ goes by the special name 'circle') with radius $R$ we arrive at:



$$pi R^2 approxsum_r=1^R^2phi_2(r)$$ and after dividing both sides by $4R^2$ and unpacking our definitions we arrive $$fracpi4=lim_Rtoinfty frac1R^2sum_r=1^R^2sum_rsin Big(fracpi2d Big)$$
$$=sum_n=1^inftyfrac1nsinBig(fracpi2d Big)$$



So now that we've seen the development for a $2$-dimensional sphere what's the development for 8-dimensional sphere? Note that the $phi_8(r)= 16sum_r (-1)^r+dd^3$ which gives a way of approximate the volume of an $8$-dimensional hypersphere:



$$frac124pi^4 R^8 approx sum_r=1^R^2phi_8(r)$$



We divide both sides by $16R^8$ to arrive at



$$fracpi^4384= lim_Rtoinfty frac1R^8sum_r=1^R^2 sum_r (-1)^r+dd^3$$



In fact! It looks to me like for any whole number $c$,



$$fracpi^4384= lim_Rtoinfty frac1R^4csum_r=1^R^c sum_r (-1)^r+dd^3$$



This does provide a nice sequence which converges to $pi^4/384$. Letting $c=1$ this sequence's rate of convergence is pretty atrocious.



$$1,frac816,frac3681,frac107256,frac233625,dots $$



The printed numbers are all accurate to ... zero decimal places... it should converge nonetheless.



but taking $c$ larger we arrive at this number much faster. For $c=2$,



$$1,frac107256,frac21136561,frac1912865536, dots $$



Only the last number printed is accurate to the first decimal of $pi^4/384$.



Can I see anything else here? Is there a closed form for this



$$sum_r=1^R^csum_r(-1)^r+d d^3$$



Sequences of interest include A008457, A138503. I think this link may be a good resource but (I am pretty sure) the "formula" therein should be labelled as a generating function A055414.



I suppose it's unlikely that the problem is easier $c>1$ but I figured I would include this thought just in case the problem is somehow solvable for some specific $c$.



A more general food for thought question
Does this development get me similar looking things for other dimensions $n$?







share|cite|improve this question














Specific Question



Let $R$ be a whole number. Is it possible for any whole number $c>0$ that there is a nicer form for $sum_r=1^R^csum_r(-1)^r+d d^3$? I can hope that we can just evaluate this sum but in lieu of that maybe something cheaper computationally. Taking $c=1$ we can examine:
$$f(x)=sum_r=1^xsum_r(-1)^r+d d^3$$
Here is a table of the first 100 values of this function $f$. This function must grow $O(x^4)$ for reasons which should be clear after reading the exposition. TLDR: $f(x)/x^4$ limits to $fracpi^4384$ as $x$ gets large.



Exposition.



Let $phi_n(r)$ denote the number of integer solutions to the $n$-dimensional hypersphere $r=sum_i=1^n x_i^2$.



Then discovering $phi_2(r)=4 sum_r sin(fracpi2d)$ allows us to find a formula for $pi$. Namely, Leibniz's formula for $pi$. Considering that the sum of number of integer solutions for each $r$ from $1$ to $R^2$ should approximate the volume of a sphere (which for this special case $n=2$ goes by the special name 'circle') with radius $R$ we arrive at:



$$pi R^2 approxsum_r=1^R^2phi_2(r)$$ and after dividing both sides by $4R^2$ and unpacking our definitions we arrive $$fracpi4=lim_Rtoinfty frac1R^2sum_r=1^R^2sum_rsin Big(fracpi2d Big)$$
$$=sum_n=1^inftyfrac1nsinBig(fracpi2d Big)$$



So now that we've seen the development for a $2$-dimensional sphere what's the development for 8-dimensional sphere? Note that the $phi_8(r)= 16sum_r (-1)^r+dd^3$ which gives a way of approximate the volume of an $8$-dimensional hypersphere:



$$frac124pi^4 R^8 approx sum_r=1^R^2phi_8(r)$$



We divide both sides by $16R^8$ to arrive at



$$fracpi^4384= lim_Rtoinfty frac1R^8sum_r=1^R^2 sum_r (-1)^r+dd^3$$



In fact! It looks to me like for any whole number $c$,



$$fracpi^4384= lim_Rtoinfty frac1R^4csum_r=1^R^c sum_r (-1)^r+dd^3$$



This does provide a nice sequence which converges to $pi^4/384$. Letting $c=1$ this sequence's rate of convergence is pretty atrocious.



$$1,frac816,frac3681,frac107256,frac233625,dots $$



The printed numbers are all accurate to ... zero decimal places... it should converge nonetheless.



but taking $c$ larger we arrive at this number much faster. For $c=2$,



$$1,frac107256,frac21136561,frac1912865536, dots $$



Only the last number printed is accurate to the first decimal of $pi^4/384$.



Can I see anything else here? Is there a closed form for this



$$sum_r=1^R^csum_r(-1)^r+d d^3$$



Sequences of interest include A008457, A138503. I think this link may be a good resource but (I am pretty sure) the "formula" therein should be labelled as a generating function A055414.



I suppose it's unlikely that the problem is easier $c>1$ but I figured I would include this thought just in case the problem is somehow solvable for some specific $c$.



A more general food for thought question
Does this development get me similar looking things for other dimensions $n$?









share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Aug 12 at 2:08

























asked Aug 11 at 0:26









Mason

1,2401224




1,2401224











  • You have a sum over r, but r does not appear in the summand?
    – herb steinberg
    Aug 11 at 0:34










  • Sorry about that 'circle' joke too. Unclear if you can hear my tongue and cheek humor over the internet.
    – Mason
    Aug 11 at 0:40










  • @herbsteinberg. I think I got them all.
    – Mason
    Aug 11 at 0:48










  • If anyone wanted to chime in about appropriate tags that would help too.
    – Mason
    Aug 11 at 0:55










  • Wouldn't plugging $sqrt[2]R^c$ into your formula proves your assertion? In fact it seems like the sum converges to $fracpi^4384$ for all real $cge 1$
    – cortek
    Aug 11 at 4:13

















  • You have a sum over r, but r does not appear in the summand?
    – herb steinberg
    Aug 11 at 0:34










  • Sorry about that 'circle' joke too. Unclear if you can hear my tongue and cheek humor over the internet.
    – Mason
    Aug 11 at 0:40










  • @herbsteinberg. I think I got them all.
    – Mason
    Aug 11 at 0:48










  • If anyone wanted to chime in about appropriate tags that would help too.
    – Mason
    Aug 11 at 0:55










  • Wouldn't plugging $sqrt[2]R^c$ into your formula proves your assertion? In fact it seems like the sum converges to $fracpi^4384$ for all real $cge 1$
    – cortek
    Aug 11 at 4:13
















You have a sum over r, but r does not appear in the summand?
– herb steinberg
Aug 11 at 0:34




You have a sum over r, but r does not appear in the summand?
– herb steinberg
Aug 11 at 0:34












Sorry about that 'circle' joke too. Unclear if you can hear my tongue and cheek humor over the internet.
– Mason
Aug 11 at 0:40




Sorry about that 'circle' joke too. Unclear if you can hear my tongue and cheek humor over the internet.
– Mason
Aug 11 at 0:40












@herbsteinberg. I think I got them all.
– Mason
Aug 11 at 0:48




@herbsteinberg. I think I got them all.
– Mason
Aug 11 at 0:48












If anyone wanted to chime in about appropriate tags that would help too.
– Mason
Aug 11 at 0:55




If anyone wanted to chime in about appropriate tags that would help too.
– Mason
Aug 11 at 0:55












Wouldn't plugging $sqrt[2]R^c$ into your formula proves your assertion? In fact it seems like the sum converges to $fracpi^4384$ for all real $cge 1$
– cortek
Aug 11 at 4:13





Wouldn't plugging $sqrt[2]R^c$ into your formula proves your assertion? In fact it seems like the sum converges to $fracpi^4384$ for all real $cge 1$
– cortek
Aug 11 at 4:13











1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
0
down vote













Neat Question! What follows is mostly a long comment.



Define $tildesigma_s(n):=sum_d(-1)^d-1d^s$, an "alternating sum of divisors function." Your sum becomes $sum_r=1^x(-1)^r+1tildesigma_3(r)$.
If you now take the classical sum-of-divisors $sigma_s(n)$, then it's easy to see that $tildesigma_s(2k+1)=sigma_s(2k+1)$ and $tildesigma_s(2k)=sigma_s(2k)-2^s+1sigma_s(k)$.



Your sum is almost the famous Ramanujan Eisenstein sum $Q(q):=1+240sum_r=1^inftysigma_3(r)q^r=1+240sum_r=1^infty fracr^3q^r1-q^r$, the difference being your sum is finite and with the caveat that this sum blows up for $|q|=1$. That's unfortunate because for $|q|<1$, there are a slew of identites that $Q$ satisfies, and I'm not sure they will carry over easily in the finite case. It looks like this might be relevant paper, where you'll find a compendium of identities for $tildesigma_3(n)$, along with analogous infinite Ramanujan Eisenstein sums:



Convolution Sums of some functions on divisors -- Hahn






share|cite|improve this answer






















  • Thanks! Just a note: $E_4$ in the notation of this wiki
    – Mason
    Aug 11 at 6:42










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%2f2878934%2fa-nicer-form-for-sum-r-1m-sum-dr-1rd-d3%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest






























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
0
down vote













Neat Question! What follows is mostly a long comment.



Define $tildesigma_s(n):=sum_d(-1)^d-1d^s$, an "alternating sum of divisors function." Your sum becomes $sum_r=1^x(-1)^r+1tildesigma_3(r)$.
If you now take the classical sum-of-divisors $sigma_s(n)$, then it's easy to see that $tildesigma_s(2k+1)=sigma_s(2k+1)$ and $tildesigma_s(2k)=sigma_s(2k)-2^s+1sigma_s(k)$.



Your sum is almost the famous Ramanujan Eisenstein sum $Q(q):=1+240sum_r=1^inftysigma_3(r)q^r=1+240sum_r=1^infty fracr^3q^r1-q^r$, the difference being your sum is finite and with the caveat that this sum blows up for $|q|=1$. That's unfortunate because for $|q|<1$, there are a slew of identites that $Q$ satisfies, and I'm not sure they will carry over easily in the finite case. It looks like this might be relevant paper, where you'll find a compendium of identities for $tildesigma_3(n)$, along with analogous infinite Ramanujan Eisenstein sums:



Convolution Sums of some functions on divisors -- Hahn






share|cite|improve this answer






















  • Thanks! Just a note: $E_4$ in the notation of this wiki
    – Mason
    Aug 11 at 6:42














up vote
0
down vote













Neat Question! What follows is mostly a long comment.



Define $tildesigma_s(n):=sum_d(-1)^d-1d^s$, an "alternating sum of divisors function." Your sum becomes $sum_r=1^x(-1)^r+1tildesigma_3(r)$.
If you now take the classical sum-of-divisors $sigma_s(n)$, then it's easy to see that $tildesigma_s(2k+1)=sigma_s(2k+1)$ and $tildesigma_s(2k)=sigma_s(2k)-2^s+1sigma_s(k)$.



Your sum is almost the famous Ramanujan Eisenstein sum $Q(q):=1+240sum_r=1^inftysigma_3(r)q^r=1+240sum_r=1^infty fracr^3q^r1-q^r$, the difference being your sum is finite and with the caveat that this sum blows up for $|q|=1$. That's unfortunate because for $|q|<1$, there are a slew of identites that $Q$ satisfies, and I'm not sure they will carry over easily in the finite case. It looks like this might be relevant paper, where you'll find a compendium of identities for $tildesigma_3(n)$, along with analogous infinite Ramanujan Eisenstein sums:



Convolution Sums of some functions on divisors -- Hahn






share|cite|improve this answer






















  • Thanks! Just a note: $E_4$ in the notation of this wiki
    – Mason
    Aug 11 at 6:42












up vote
0
down vote










up vote
0
down vote









Neat Question! What follows is mostly a long comment.



Define $tildesigma_s(n):=sum_d(-1)^d-1d^s$, an "alternating sum of divisors function." Your sum becomes $sum_r=1^x(-1)^r+1tildesigma_3(r)$.
If you now take the classical sum-of-divisors $sigma_s(n)$, then it's easy to see that $tildesigma_s(2k+1)=sigma_s(2k+1)$ and $tildesigma_s(2k)=sigma_s(2k)-2^s+1sigma_s(k)$.



Your sum is almost the famous Ramanujan Eisenstein sum $Q(q):=1+240sum_r=1^inftysigma_3(r)q^r=1+240sum_r=1^infty fracr^3q^r1-q^r$, the difference being your sum is finite and with the caveat that this sum blows up for $|q|=1$. That's unfortunate because for $|q|<1$, there are a slew of identites that $Q$ satisfies, and I'm not sure they will carry over easily in the finite case. It looks like this might be relevant paper, where you'll find a compendium of identities for $tildesigma_3(n)$, along with analogous infinite Ramanujan Eisenstein sums:



Convolution Sums of some functions on divisors -- Hahn






share|cite|improve this answer














Neat Question! What follows is mostly a long comment.



Define $tildesigma_s(n):=sum_d(-1)^d-1d^s$, an "alternating sum of divisors function." Your sum becomes $sum_r=1^x(-1)^r+1tildesigma_3(r)$.
If you now take the classical sum-of-divisors $sigma_s(n)$, then it's easy to see that $tildesigma_s(2k+1)=sigma_s(2k+1)$ and $tildesigma_s(2k)=sigma_s(2k)-2^s+1sigma_s(k)$.



Your sum is almost the famous Ramanujan Eisenstein sum $Q(q):=1+240sum_r=1^inftysigma_3(r)q^r=1+240sum_r=1^infty fracr^3q^r1-q^r$, the difference being your sum is finite and with the caveat that this sum blows up for $|q|=1$. That's unfortunate because for $|q|<1$, there are a slew of identites that $Q$ satisfies, and I'm not sure they will carry over easily in the finite case. It looks like this might be relevant paper, where you'll find a compendium of identities for $tildesigma_3(n)$, along with analogous infinite Ramanujan Eisenstein sums:



Convolution Sums of some functions on divisors -- Hahn







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited Aug 12 at 2:38









darij grinberg

9,28132960




9,28132960










answered Aug 11 at 6:22









Alex R.

23.7k12352




23.7k12352











  • Thanks! Just a note: $E_4$ in the notation of this wiki
    – Mason
    Aug 11 at 6:42
















  • Thanks! Just a note: $E_4$ in the notation of this wiki
    – Mason
    Aug 11 at 6:42















Thanks! Just a note: $E_4$ in the notation of this wiki
– Mason
Aug 11 at 6:42




Thanks! Just a note: $E_4$ in the notation of this wiki
– Mason
Aug 11 at 6:42












 

draft saved


draft discarded


























 


draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2878934%2fa-nicer-form-for-sum-r-1m-sum-dr-1rd-d3%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest













































































這個網誌中的熱門文章

How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

Carbon dioxide

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