#Singular Log-Sine Integral from 0 to 1
72 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)
that's nice
so just numerical integration is enough
that's also what wolfram alpha showed
anyone tell me where i m mistaking?
hmm
,w euler-mascheroni constant
what makes you think that there will be a closed form?
i still gave it a shot with the first substitution you said and arrived to a series representation of this value
$$\lim_{N\to\infty} \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{(-1)^k}{(2k+1)!} \underbrace{\int_1^N \frac{\ln(v) v^{2k}}{v-1} dv}_{I_k}$$
but i'm 99% sure you can't do anything to simplify I_k
not even for any specific k
wait
typo
artemetra
actually i'm wrong
there is a way through the dilogarithm
,w integral (ln(v))/(v-1)
here's I_5
i'm pretty sure what i happening here is wolframalpha spamming integration by parts
first integrating ln(v)/(v-1) to get the dilogarithm form and then just dealing with a regular rational integral
brb
okay it's late here and i can't write the complete proof but you'll have to trust me on this lol
$$I_{k} = \left.\left(-\operatorname{Li}2 (1-v) - \sum{j=1}^{2k} \left[\frac{v^j}{j^2} - \frac{1}{j} v^j \ln(v)\right]\right)\right|_{v\to 0}^{v=1-N}$$
something like this
artemetra
no guarantee that this makes any sense but i am pretty sure it does lol
the really cool thing is that as v->0, all the terms in the sum vanish
so we simply have $I_k = -\operatorname{Li}_2(N)$
artemetra
wait no that makes no sense
yeah i'm wrong, it's v->1 not v->0
$$I_{k} = \left.\left(-\operatorname{Li}2 (1-v) - \sum{j=1}^{2k} \left[\frac{v^j}{j^2} - \frac{1}{j} v^j \ln(v)\right]\right)\right|_{v=1}^{v=1-N}$$
artemetra
don't know where you can if you can take this much further
at v=1 all the ln terms are 0 so that's nice ig
but other than that this is probably the closest you'll get to a closed form
if i write it as one expression..
$$\lim_{N\to\infty} \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{(-1)^k}{(2k+1)!} \left.\left(-\operatorname{Li}2 (1-v) - \sum{j=1}^{2k} \left[\frac{v^j}{j^2} - \frac{1}{j} v^j \ln(v)\right]\right)\right|_{v=1}^{v=1-N}$$
artemetra

take this with a grain of salt though
it's 1 am here
@dreamy galleon this is probably the farthest you can get it to be, although i likely made a mistake somewhere along the way. if this doesn't suffice, i recommend you post this on math stack exchange
i thought so too but it does not, ghe factorial outgrows the exponential. this is why the limit is outside the whole thing: you initially pick a huge N and then evaluate it
but again this is probably VERY numerically unstable so uh yeah you have a point
interesting
have you tried u=1/x
duh obviously you've tried that
I'll try it tmrw morning 👍
it uses Meijer G function and the generalized hypergeometric function (that's a mouthful)