Wiki
Wiki

Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.

Updated


Source. Théorème, printed p. 1287 (physical PDF p. 1); the expressions (1), (3), (5) on p. 1287; proof on p. 1289 (PDF p. 3), formulas (14)--(15), from the Lemme of p. 1288. Read on the page images; the scan has no text layer.

Statement

For q∈Z∖{−1,0,1}q\in\mathbb Z\setminus\{-1,0,1\} put, as in the note's (1), (3) and (5) (the first form is defined for every q∈Cq\in\mathbb C with ∣q∣>1|q|>1),

ζ(q;2)=∑n=1∞qn(q−1qn−1)2=(q−1)2∑n=1∞nqn−1=(q−1)2∑n=1∞σ(n)qn,\zeta(q;2)=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}q^n\Big(\frac{q-1}{q^n-1}\Big)^2 =(q-1)^2\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{n}{q^n-1} =(q-1)^2\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{\sigma(n)}{q^n},

where σ(n)=∑d∣nd\sigma(n)=\sum_{d\mid n}d (the note's d1(n)d_1(n)); Step 1 proves the two equalities. Then ζ(q;2)\zeta(q;2) is irrational.

Specialization. For q=2q=2, ζ(2;2)=∑n≥1σ(n)/2n\zeta(2;2)=\sum_{n\ge1}\sigma(n)/2^n, the number of Problem 250, so that number is irrational. For every integer qq with ∣q∣≥2|q|\ge2 the factor (q−1)2(q-1)^2 is a nonzero integer, so ∑n≥1σ(n)/qn\sum_{n\ge1}\sigma(n)/q^n is irrational for every such qq; this is the all-base form in which Erdős posed the question in 1948 and 1957.

Premises

  • The Lemme of the same note (essential), with its complete author-recorded proof on its page; it consumes Euler's pentagonal number theorem and Théorème 2 of Duverney 1993 (theoreme_2), identified there with their reading depths. The Théorème uses from the Lemme only that f(1/q)f(1/q) and (1/q)f′(1/q)(1/q)f'(1/q) admit no nontrivial Q\mathbb Q-linear relation with 11.
  • Elementary analysis, used without citation: an absolutely convergent double series may be summed in any order; a series of differentiable functions that converges on an interval and whose derivative series converges uniformly there may be differentiated termwise; and −log⁡(1−t)≤t/(1−t)-\log(1-t)\le t/(1-t) for 0≤t<10\le t<1.

Complete rewritten proof

Throughout, q∈Zq\in\mathbb Z with ∣q∣≥2|q|\ge2.

Step 1 (the three expressions (1), (3), (5)). For n≥1n\ge1 put t=q−nt=q^{-n}, so 0<∣t∣≤1/20<|t|\le1/2. Then qn((q−1)/(qn−1))2=(q−1)2 t(1−t)−2q^n\big((q-1)/(q^n-1)\big)^2=(q-1)^2\,t(1-t)^{-2}, and t(1−t)−2=∑j≥1jtjt(1-t)^{-2}=\sum_{j\ge1}jt^j for ∣t∣<1|t|<1. Hence

ζ(q;2)=(q−1)2∑n=1∞∑j=1∞j q−nj.\zeta(q;2)=(q-1)^2\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\sum_{j=1}^{\infty}j\,q^{-nj}.

The double series converges absolutely, because ∑n∑jj∣q∣−nj=∑n∣q∣−n(1−∣q∣−n)−2≤4∑n∣q∣−n<∞\sum_{n}\sum_{j}j|q|^{-nj}=\sum_n|q|^{-n}(1-|q|^{-n})^{-2}\le4\sum_n|q|^{-n}<\infty, so it may be summed in any order. Summing over nn first, with ∑n≥1q−nj=1/(qj−1)\sum_{n\ge1}q^{-nj}=1/(q^j-1), gives the note's (3),

ζ(q;2)=(q−1)2∑j=1∞jqj−1,\zeta(q;2)=(q-1)^2\sum_{j=1}^{\infty}\frac{j}{q^j-1},

and grouping the terms by m=njm=nj, with ∑j∣mj=σ(m)\sum_{j\mid m}j=\sigma(m), gives the note's (5),

ζ(q;2)=(q−1)2∑m=1∞σ(m)qm.\zeta(q;2)=(q-1)^2\sum_{m=1}^{\infty}\frac{\sigma(m)}{q^m}.

(The note reaches (3) by exchanging the sums over nn and k=j−1k=j-1, and (5) by citing the Lambert-series expansion, Hardy and Wright, p. 257.) Write Dq=∑j≥1j/(qj−1)D_q=\sum_{j\ge1}j/(q^j-1), so that ζ(q;2)=(q−1)2Dq\zeta(q;2)=(q-1)^2D_q with (q−1)2(q-1)^2 a nonzero integer.

Step 2 (the product: convergence, positivity and the logarithmic derivative (14)). Fix 0<ρ<10<\rho<1 and let x∈[−ρ,ρ]x\in[-\rho,\rho]. For every n≥1n\ge1, 1−xn≥1−ρn>01-x^n\ge1-\rho^n>0, so ℓn(x)=log⁡(1−xn)\ell_n(x)=\log(1-x^n) is defined and ∣ℓn(x)∣≤−log⁡(1−ρn)≤ρn/(1−ρ)|\ell_n(x)|\le-\log(1-\rho^n)\le\rho^n/(1-\rho). By the M-test, ∑nℓn\sum_n\ell_n converges uniformly on [−ρ,ρ][-\rho,\rho] to a function gg, and ∏n≤N(1−xn)=exp⁡(∑n≤Nℓn(x))→eg(x)\prod_{n\le N}(1-x^n)=\exp\big(\sum_{n\le N}\ell_n(x)\big)\to e^{g(x)}. So the product (6) converges at every x∈(−1,1)x\in(-1,1) to f(x)=eg(x)>0f(x)=e^{g(x)}>0; in particular

f(1/q)>0.f(1/q)>0 .

The derivatives ℓn′(x)=−nxn−1/(1−xn)\ell_n'(x)=-nx^{n-1}/(1-x^n) satisfy ∣ℓn′(x)∣≤nρn−1/(1−ρ)|\ell_n'(x)|\le n\rho^{n-1}/(1-\rho) on [−ρ,ρ][-\rho,\rho], a summable bound, so ∑nℓn′\sum_n\ell_n' converges uniformly there and gg is differentiable on (−ρ,ρ)(-\rho,\rho) with g′=∑nℓn′g'=\sum_n\ell_n'. Since ρ<1\rho<1 was arbitrary, f=egf=e^g is differentiable on (−1,1)(-1,1) with f′=g′ff'=g'f, which is the note's (14):

xf′(x)f(x)=xg′(x)=−∑n=1∞nxn1−xn(∣x∣<1).x\frac{f'(x)}{f(x)}=xg'(x)=-\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{nx^n}{1-x^n} \qquad(|x|<1).

This f′f' is the derivative used in the Lemme: by Euler's theorem (premise (E) on the Lemme page) ff coincides on (−1,1)(-1,1) with the power series (7), so both descriptions of ff have the same derivative.

Step 3 (the value (15)). Put x=1/q∈(−1,1)x=1/q\in(-1,1) in (14). Since f(1/q)>0f(1/q)>0 by Step 2, the division is legitimate and

(1/q)f′(1/q)f(1/q)=−∑n=1∞nq−n1−q−n=−∑n=1∞nqn−1=−Dq.\frac{(1/q)f'(1/q)}{f(1/q)}=-\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{nq^{-n}}{1-q^{-n}} =-\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{n}{q^n-1}=-D_q .

The note writes (15) without remarking on f(1/q)≠0f(1/q)\ne0.

Step 4 (conclusion). Suppose ζ(q;2)\zeta(q;2) were rational. Then Dq=ζ(q;2)/(q−1)2D_q=\zeta(q;2)/(q-1)^2 is rational, and (15) gives

0⋅1+Dq⋅f(1/q)+1⋅(1/q)f′(1/q)=0,0\cdot1+D_q\cdot f(1/q)+1\cdot(1/q)f'(1/q)=0,

a linear relation over Q\mathbb Q among 11, f(1/q)f(1/q) and (1/q)f′(1/q)(1/q)f'(1/q) with a nonzero coefficient. This contradicts the Lemme. Hence ζ(q;2)\zeta(q;2) is irrational, and by (5) so is ∑n≥1σ(n)/qn\sum_{n\ge1}\sigma(n)/q^n. ■\blacksquare (The note: "Le théorème résulte donc immédiatement du lemme et de (3).")

Remarks

  • What the reconstruction supplies beyond the printed text: the absolute convergence behind the exchanges of summation in (3) and (5); the convergence, positivity and differentiability of the product in Step 2, which the note takes for granted when it states (14) on p. 1289; the nonvanishing f(1/q)≠0f(1/q)\ne0 needed for (15). The route is the note's.
  • (5) is not needed for the irrationality of ζ(q;2)\zeta(q;2); it is what identifies ζ(q;2)\zeta(q;2) with Erdős's form and with the site's series.
  • The note says the deduction of the Théorème from the Lemme follows the route of Bundschuh and Väänänen (Compositio Math. 91 (1994), no. 2, 175--199; the note's reference [1] prints pp. 175--201) for ∑n≥11/(qn−1)\sum_{n\ge1}1/(q^n-1). The argument gives irrationality only; for irrationality measures see Zudilin 2002 and Smet and Van Assche 2009.

Verification

This full reconstruction is independently reviewed; verdict refutation-failed; grade pass. It contains every deduction of the note's proof of the Théorème (p. 1289, formulas (14)--(15), with (3) and (5) of p. 1287) together with the expansions listed under Remarks; the Lemme it consumes has its own complete, independently reviewed proof and its own external premises. A fresh-context whole-claim review of this page and of the Lemme page is filed under this card's evidence/verify/, with the distinct grade beside it. The proof is therefore independently accepted compilation proof coverage relative to Euler's pentagonal number theorem, not proved here, and to Théorème 2 of Duverney 1993, whose statement and proof were checked. The reviewed text is the copy evidence/assets/reviewed_pages/theoreme.md, which the repository does not hold; the current page differs from it only in the desc field, this Verification section, the updated field and, since 2026-10-07, the page range of the Bundschuh and Väänänen paper under Remarks, where the reviewed copy repeats the note's misprinted 175--201; that change touches neither the statement nor the proof. The result is relied on for the status of Problem 250 as a refereed publication (Zbl 0843.11034), the first published proof that ∑n≥1σ(n)/2n\sum_{n\ge1}\sigma(n)/2^n is irrational, independently of this reconstruction.

Bears on. #250: this theorem at q=2q=2 settles the problem's exact question in the affirmative.