0

Consider for $x>0$ and $k$ a positive integer :

$$ f(x,k) = \sum_{n=1}^{k} (\frac{x}{n})^n = \sum_{n=1}^{k} \frac{x^n}{n^n} $$

and

$$ f(x) = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} (\frac{x}{n})^n = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{x^n}{n^n} $$

Now clearly $f(x) < \exp(x) -1$.

But the approximation $\exp(x/e) -1$ is not too bad.

This follows for instance from stirlings formula.

In fact considering $f(x,k)$ is an analogue to considering the truncated $\exp(x)$ :

What is the best way to estimate the truncated exponential $f(x,k) = \sum_{n = 0}^{k} \frac{x^n}{n!} $?

But there is something interesting here :

For sufficiently large integer $x$ we have

$$ \exp(-1) - \frac{1}{x - \ln(1+x)} < f(x) - f(x,x) < \exp(-1) - \frac{1}{1+x}$$

or equivalently because

$$f(x) - f(x,x) = \sum_{n=x+1}^{\infty} (\frac{x}{n})^n = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} (\frac{x}{x+1+n})^{x+1+n} $$ ,

We have conjecture $A$ :

$$ \exp(-1) - \frac{1}{x - \ln(1+x)} < \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} (\frac{x}{x+1+n})^{x+1+n} < \exp(-1) - \frac{1}{1+x}$$

How to prove this ?

How many ways are there to prove this ?

Is using Stirling's approximation neccessary ?

mick
  • 17,886

0 Answers0