Talk:Lerch zeta function

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The PDF S. Kanemitsu, Y. Tanigawa and H. Tsukada, A generalization of Bochner's formula, attributes the fomula below to Erdelyi (see the conclusions of that paper), however, thier formula is missing a factor of z^{-a} in front. Which formula is correct, this one or thiers?

linas 01:57, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Try s = a = 1. Charles Matthews 13:19, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Checked numerically for different values for s and a - it's definitely wrong without the z^-a term, and the sum appears to converge to the transcendent everywhere it claims to. I'm going to remove the veracity remark, unless someone contests again. 76.210.123.228 (talk) 05:45, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

not-explained symol[edit]

What stands (Series repr., If s is a positive integer) for? --217.80.120.235 (talk) 11:57, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification[edit]

s=1 is a singular/undefined point. Johnson introduces a generalised Lerch zeta function (see equation (5)) which might be what the paper mentioned (A generalization of Bochner's formula) is considering (the link given seems to be inactive). See [1]

is the Digamma function. Please edit as appropriate.

Lerch zeta-function and Lerch transcendent[edit]

After the beginning of the article, the Lerch zeta-function is mentioned only once, and all formulas are written in terms of the Lerch transcendent. Because of this, I think it would be appropriate to change the name to Lerch transcendent. K9re11 (talk) 03:30, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relation with Hurwitz zeta function[edit]

Zeta(s,a)= lerch (1,s,a) s cannot be negative number but it isnot clarified where a is positive ISHANBULLS (talk) 03:29, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]