32

I was messing around with Wolfram Alpha and eventually found the following surprising fact:

\begin{align*}\frac{\tanh^{-1}(\frac23\sqrt{1+x})-\tanh^{-1}(\frac23)}{\sqrt{1+x}}={}&\frac35x-\frac{21}{100}x^2+\frac{303}{1000}x^3-\frac{7\,533}{40\,000}x^4\\&+\frac{437\,289}{2\,000\,000}x^5-\frac{1\,341\,249}{8\,000\,000}x^6+O(x^7)\end{align*}

So many powers of ten! What's happening? Why are they here?

If we call this function $f(x)$, it seems that perhaps $f(10x)$ is the exponential generating function of some integer sequence. That is, it seems that $f(10x)=\sum_{n=0}^\infty c_n\frac{x^n}{n!}$ for some integer sequence $c_n$. Why would this be?

(Even then we should expect the denominator of the sixth term to be $6!\cdot10^6$ rather than the much smaller $8\cdot10^6$.)

It may be useful to know that $$\frac{\tanh^{-1}(\frac23\sqrt{1+x})}{\sqrt{1+x}}=\int_0^1\frac2{1+4t-4xt^2}dt$$ though I don't immediately see how that helps (I see very few $10$s here).

EDIT: The function $f(x)$ also satisfies the differential equation $$2(1+x)f'(x)+f(x)=\frac6{5-4x}$$ with boundary condition $f(0)=0$, if that's useful.

  • If $2/3$ is replaced with $a$ you get a series expansion with powers of $(a^2-1)$ in the denominator. $(2/3)^2 - 1 = -5/9$. Not sure why that is, though, or what to do with that though - that explains the presence of factors of 5 but not factors of 2. – Michael Lugo Dec 09 '24 at 21:36
  • So, your claim is that the denominator of the reduced fraction the $n$-th coefficient $a_n \in \mathbb{Q}$ is divisible by $10^n$ for all $n \geq 2$? – psl2Z Dec 09 '24 at 21:38
  • @psl2Z Either $10^n$ or perhaps $10$ raised to something that grows approximately like $n$. In addition, $10^nn!a_n$ appear to be integers (and perhaps $n!$ can be replaced by something else that does not grow as quickly). – Akiva Weinberger Dec 09 '24 at 21:43
  • 1
    Note that the sixth term's denominator being $8\cdot 10^6$ instead of $6! \cdot 10^6$ could just be due to the numerator having a factor of 90 – sudgy Dec 09 '24 at 22:55
  • The coefficients of $\ln(2\sqrt{x+1}+3)$ are $\sum\limits_{k=1}^n\frac{(-1)^{n+1}2^{2(k-n)}5^{-k}\Gamma(2n-k)}{n!(n-k)!}=-\frac1n(\frac45)^n I_{-\frac14}(n,n)$ with the regularized beta function matching GEdgar’s answer – Тyma Gaidash Dec 09 '24 at 23:37
  • @ТymaGaidash I suppose we can write $(2n-k-1)!$ instead of $\Gamma(2n-k)$. – Akiva Weinberger Dec 10 '24 at 00:29

5 Answers5

25

As you've pointed out, the given function $f(x)=\frac{\tanh^{-1}(\frac23\sqrt{1+x})-\tanh^{-1}(\frac23)}{\sqrt{1+x}}$ satisfies the differential equation $2(1+x)(5-4x)f'(x)+(5-4x)f(x)=6$ with $f(0)=0$. We can now consider a power series solution $\sum_{n=0}^\infty a_nx^n$ to the same equation.

For every nonconstant term $a_nx^n$, the LHS of the differential equation becomes $$(-8n-4)a_nx^{n+1}+(2n+5)a_nx^n+10na_nx^{n-1},$$ so the coefficient of $x^n$ in the LHS of the differential equation is $$(-8(n-1)-4)a_{n-1}+(2n+5)a_n+10(n+1)a_{n+1},$$ which must be equal to $0$ for $n\geq 1$. Hence, shifting the indices and rearranging, we have the recursion $$a_n=\frac{-(2n+3)a_{n-1}+(8n-12)a_{n-2}}{10n}.$$ And a $10$ shows up in the denominator! In your case, the starting coefficients are $a_0=0$ and $a_1=\frac 35$. Note that there is a possibility for the numerator to "cancel out" with the $10$ in the denominator (e.g. when going to the $x^6$ term), but holistically speaking this division by $10$ is what leads to the pattern you're noticing.

Generally, the behavior of the power series expansion seems to be closely related to the differential equations the function solves. Differential equations with certain properties (e.g. in this case, a constant term of $10$ in front of the $f'(x)$) can translate those properties recursively into the power series expansion.

masky
  • 1,594
  • Nice! Very clean. I accepted psl2Z's answer because they posted 5 minutes before you did. Incidentally, I managed to find a formula for the coefficients here, (different from psl2Z's), but it doesn't quite show that $10^nn!a_n\in\Bbb Z$ because it doesn't account for all of the factors of $2$. – Akiva Weinberger Dec 10 '24 at 00:18
  • You can, if you choose, de-accept an answer you have previously accepted and accept a different one. In general, 2 h is not a very long time to wait to obtain a decently sized sample of answers before accepting any. – Paul Tanenbaum Dec 10 '24 at 19:10
  • 1
    @PaulTanenbaum Both answers were available when I made my decision. – Akiva Weinberger Dec 10 '24 at 20:26
14

Let $f(x) = \sum_{n=0}^{\infty}a_n x^n$ be the Taylor series at $x = 0$. Use your differential equation:

Differentiate it $n$-times to get $$2(1+x)f^{(n+1)}(x) + (1+2n) f^{(n)}(x) = \frac{6\cdot 4^n n!}{(5-4x)^{n+1}}$$

Therefore at $x = 0$: $$2f^{(n+1)}(0)+ (1+2n) f^{(n)}(0) = \frac{6\cdot 4^n n!}{5^{n+1}}$$

By induction it follows for all integers $n\geq 0$ $$(n+1)! \cdot a_{n+1} = f^{(n+1)}(0) = \sum_{k=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-k}\frac{\prod_{r = k+1}^{n} (2r+1)}{2^{n-k}}\cdot\frac{3\cdot 4^k \cdot k!}{5^{k+1}}$$

In particular $$10^{n+1}(n+1)! \cdot a_{n+1} = \sum_{k=0}^{n} (-1)^{n-k}\cdot 2^{k+1}\cdot 5^{n-k}\cdot 3\cdot 4^k \cdot k! \cdot\prod_{r = k+1}^{n} (2r+1) \in \mathbb{Z}$$ Thus, since $c_n = n! 10^n a_n$ for all $n \geq 0$, it is $c_n = 10^n n! a_n \in \mathbb{Z}$ for all $n \geq 1$. Further $c_0 = 0 \in \mathbb{Z}$ and thus $c_n \in \mathbb{Z}$ for all $n \geq 0$.

psl2Z
  • 5,772
  • 1
    Nice! The fact that you managed to get an explicit formula inspired me to try as well. I ended up finding a very different one (here); I don't see an immediate way to transform your formula into mine. (Also, my formula couldn't account for all of the factors of 2.) – Akiva Weinberger Dec 10 '24 at 00:14
5

Comment
Can be re-written: $$ {\ln \left( {\frac {\left( 2\,\sqrt {1+x}+ 3 \right)}{\sqrt{25-20\,x}} } \right) }={\frac{3}{5}}x+{\frac{9}{100}}{x}^{2}+{ \frac{123}{1000}}{x}^{3}+{\frac{1077}{40000}}{x}^{4}+{\frac{100089}{ 2000000}}{x}^{5}+O \left( {x}^{6} \right) $$ Even without the denominator, we have $$ \ln \left( 2\,\sqrt {1+x}+3 \right) =\ln \left( 5 \right) +{\frac{1 }{5}}x-{\frac{7}{100}}{x}^{2}+{\frac{113}{3000}}{x}^{3}-{\frac{971}{ 40000}}{x}^{4}+{\frac{34553}{2000000}}{x}^{5}+O \left( {x}^{6} \right) $$

GEdgar
  • 117,296
3

Here's my own partial progress. Using the integral (rewriting it as $\int_0^1\frac{2/(1+4t)}{1-4xt^2/(1+4t)}\,{\rm d}t$, expanding it as a geometric series, letting $u=1+4t$, and expanding each resulting term using the binomial formula), I have found a formula for the coefficients (different from the one found by psl2Z).

If we write $f(x)=\sum_{n=0}^\infty a_nx^n$, then $$a_n=\frac1{10^n}\cdot\frac1{2^{n+1}}\sum_{\substack{0\le k\le 2n\\ k\ne n}}\left(\left(-1\right)^{k}\binom{2n}k\frac{5^{k}}{k-n}\right).$$ This almost shows that $10^nn!a_n$ is an integer, except for the pesky factor of $\frac1{2^{n+1}}$.

(Nicely, I could almost simply ignore the $-\frac{\tanh^{-1}(\frac23)}{\sqrt{1+x}}$ portion of $f(x)$, since the result was the same as deleting all $u^{-1}$ terms in the transformed integral.)

0

I would argue that nobody should expect, a priori, any particular constant such as 10 to appear so much more often than others. Here is my earthy, "common sense" approach to this. (I hope I do not come across as condescending or offensive.)

Suppose you prefer to see 11s. Take any series you have that has those 10's and simply change each occurrence of 10 in a term to 11 in its place. The fact that the resulting "new" series may not have a familiar form or, if expressible in some explicit form, not be of current interest? It... is... irrelevant.

Call the resulting function defined by that series S(x). Do this as often as you wish, and then write about how frequently 11's appear in these series for functions like S(x).

  • 3
    If my observation were simply that 10s appeared in the first six terms and then stopped appearing, this would not necessarily require explanation, for the reasons you have expressed. The issue is that there are, conjecturally, infinitely many 10s. This is something which demands proof. (And indeed two other people have provided such proofs, which to me are satisfactory answers to my question.) – Akiva Weinberger Dec 10 '24 at 20:22
  • 3
    Correction: "This is something which demands proof or disproof." – Akiva Weinberger Dec 10 '24 at 20:38