数理解析方法論

Irrationality of ζ(3)
1.Riemann’s zeta function –1–
Riemann’s zeta function
∑∞
1
ζ(s) =
n=1
ns
converges in ℜs > 1.
Definition The Bernoulli numbers Bn are defined by the power series expan-
sion ∞ ∞
x ∑ xn x ∑ x2n
= Bn = 1 − + B2n
ex − 1 n=0 n! 2 n=1 (2n)!
x x
Remark. x + is an even function.
e −1 2
The first few Bernoulli numbers:
B1 = −1/2, B2 = 1/6, B4 = −1/30, B6 = 1/42

Lemma 0 ∞ ( )
∏ x2
sin πx = πx 1− 2
n=1
n
Theorem (Euler) For n = 1, 2, 3, ..., –2–
(−1)n−1 22n−1
ζ(2n) = B2n π 2n
(2n)!
when n is an integer ≥ 1.
Proof. By the definition of the Bernoulli numbers,
∑∞
eix + e−ix 2ix 22n x2n
x cot x = ix ix = ix + 2ix =1− n+1
(−1) B2n
e − e−ix e −1 n=1
(2n)!

and Lemma 0 gives the expansion

∞
∑ ∑∞ ∑∞
x2 x2n
x cot x = 1 + 2 =1−2
x2 − k 2 π 2 n=1
k 2n π 2n
k=1 k=1

Now equate the coefficients of x2n in the two series for x cot x to complete the
proof.

Remark This showed that ζ(2n) is irrational.

In 1978 R. Apéry proved that ζ(3) is irrational.

2. Criterion of irrationality –3–
p0
A number α is irrational if it is not of the form ; where p0 , q0 are integers.
q0
A rational number β is characterized by the property that for p, q ∈ Z (q > 0)
p
and β ̸= , there exists an integer q0 > 0 such that
q
p 1
β− ≥ .
q qq0
On the other hand, for an irrational number α there are always infinitely many
p
such that
q
p 1
α − < 2.
q q
Plainly this yields a criterion for irrationality.
Proposition
{ } (criterion for irrationality) It there is a δ > 0 and a sequence
pn pn
of rational numbers such that ̸= α and
qn qn
pn 1
α− < 1+δ , n = 1, 2, ...
qn qn
then α is irrational.
3. Apéry’s Theorem –4–
Lemma 1 There exist two sequences of integers {An } and {Bn } such that
( )n
9
0 < |An + Bn ζ(3)| < 3 .
10
This immediately implies the theorem.

Theorem [Apéry] ζ(3) is irrational.

Proof. If ζ(3) = p/q, where p and q are integers, then the sequence of nonzero
rational numbers |An + Bn ζ(3)| ≥ 1/q.
The second inequality in Lemma 1, however, implies that this sequence be-
comes arbitrarily small as n increases. This contradiction implies that ζ(3) is
irrational.

The proof of Lemma 1 depends on the following lemmas [Beukers].

Lemma 2 Assume ∫ 1that
∫ 1 r and s are nonnegative integers. –5–
log xy r s
(1) When r > s, − x y dxdy is a rational number whose denom-
0 0 1 − xy
inator divides d3r . Here dr = lcm(1, 2...., r).
(2) { }
∫ 1∫ 1 ∑ r
log xy r r 1
− x y dxdy = 2 ζ(3) −
0 0 1 − xy k3
k=1
Proof. (1) Note that for σ > 0 and r > s,
∫ 1 ∫ 1 r+σ s+σ ∫ 1∫ 1∑ ∞
x y
dxdy = xr+σ+n y s+σ+n dxdy
0 0 1 − xy 0 0 n=0
∞
∑ 1
=
n=0
(n + r + σ + 1)(n + s + σ + 1)
∞ { }
1 ∑ 1 1
= −
r − s n=0 n + s + σ + 1 n + r + σ + 1
{ }
1 1 1
= + ··· + .
r−s s+σ+1 r+σ
Differentiate –6–
∫ 1∫ 1 { }
xr+σ y s+σ 1 1 1
dxdy = + ··· +
0 0 1 − xy r−s s+σ+1 r+σ
with respect to σ. Set σ = 0:
∫ 1∫ 1 { }
log xy r s 1 1 1
x y dxdy = − + ··· + 2
0 0 1 − xy r − s (s + 1)2 r
Thus (1) is proved.
(2) Differentiate
∫ 1∫ 1 ∑∞
xr+σ y r+σ 1
dxdy = .
0 0 1 − xy n=0
(n + r + σ + 1) 2

with respect to σ. Set σ = 0:

∫ 1∫ 1 ∞
{ }
log xy r r ∑ 2 ∑
r
1
x y dxdy = − = −2 ζ(3) − .
0 0 1 − xy n=0
(n + r + 1) 3 k 3
k=1
4. Integral of the Legendre polynomials –7–
Let
1 dn
pn (x) = n
{xn (1 − x)n } .
n! dx
which is essentially the Legendre polynomial on (0, 1).
Lemma 3 There exist integers An and Bn such that
∫ 1∫ 1
log xy
0 ̸= − pn (x)pn (y) dxdy = (An + Bn ζ(3))d−3
n .
0 0 1 − xy
Here dn = lcm(1, 2.....n).
Proof.
Since pn (x) is a polynomial with integer coefficients, the equality follows
from Lemma 2. Now observe that
∫ 1
log xy 1
− = dz.
1 − xy 0 1 − (1 − xy)z

Then the integral in the lemma can be written as

∫ 1∫ 1∫ 1
pn (x)pn (y)
dxdydz.
0 0 0 1 − (1 − xy)z
5. Triple Integral –8–
∫ 1∫ 1∫ 1
pn (x)pn (y)
dxdydz.
0 0 0 1 − (1 − xy)z
Integrate by parts n times with respect to x to see that this integral is equal
to ∫ 1∫ 1∫ 1
(xyz)n (1 − x)n pn (y)
dxdydz.
0 0 0 (1 − (1 − xy)z)n+1
Set
1−z
w=
1 − (1 − xy)z
and rewrite the last integral as
∫ 1∫ 1∫ 1
pn (y)
(1 − x)n (1 − w)n dxdydw
0 0 0 1 − (1 − xy)w
∫ 1∫ 1∫ 1
(x(1 − x)y(1 − y)w(1 − w))n
= dxdydw
0 0 0 (1 − (1 − xy)w)n+1
The last equality uses integration by parts n times. It is clear that the final
integral is nonzero and so the lemma is proved.
Lemma 4 For An and Bn as in Lemma 3, –9–
√
0 < |An + Bn ζ(3)|d−3
n < 2( 2 − 1)4n ζ(3).

Proof. The integral in Lemma 3 is equal to the integral

∫ 1∫ 1∫ 1
(x(1 − x)y(1 − y)w(1 − w))n
I= dxdydw.
0 0 0 (1 − (1 − xy)w)n+1
We find the maximum value of the integrand in I = |An + Bn ζ(3)|. Let
x(1 − x)y(1 − y)w(1 − w)
f (x, y, w) =
1 − (1 − xy)w
By solving the equations
∂f ∂f ∂f
= = = 0,
∂x ∂y ∂w
1
it is easy to see that at the maximum, x = y and w = . Thus f is
1+x
x2 (1 − x)2 √
bounded by , which is maximized at x = 2 − 1.
(1 + x)2
Thus integral I is bounded above by –10–
√ ∫ 1∫ 1∫ 1
1
( 2 − 1) 4n
dxdydz
0 0 0 1 − (1 − xy)w
√ ∫ 1∫ 1
log xy
= ( 2 − 1) 4n
− dxdy
1 − xy
√ 0 0
= 2( 2 − 1)4n ζ(3)

This proves the lemma.

Proposition (Tchebyshev) [Weak version of the prime number theorem]

Let π(n) denote the number of primes less than n. Then
n
π(n) < 1.06 .
log n
6. Proof of Lemma 1 –11–
Observe that
∏ ∏
dn = p[log n/ log p] < plog n/ log p = nπ(n) .
p≤n,p=prime p≤n,p=prime

By Tchebyshev’s proposition, it follows that

dn < n1.06n/ log n < e1.06n < 3n .

An upper bound for ζ(3) is given by

∫ ∞
dx 3
ζ(3) < 1 + = .
1 x3 2
Therefore, Lemma 4 gives
( )n ( )n
27 9
0 < |An + Bn ζ(3)| < 3 √ <3 .
( 2 + 1)4 10

Remark. ζ(3) = 1.202056903 · · ·

Exercise –12–
Assume that r and ∫ 1s∫are nonnegative integers.
1
xr y s
(1) When r > s, dxdy is a rational number whose denominator
0 0 1 − xy
divides d2r . Here dr = lcm(1, 2.....r).
(2)
∫ 1∫ 1 r r ∑r
xy 1
dxdy = ζ(2) −
0 0 1 − xy k2
k=1
(3) Let
1 dn
pn (x) = n
{xn (1 − x)n } .
n! dx
Consider the integral
∫ 1∫ 1
(1 − y)n pn (x)
I= dxdy
0 0 1 − xy
Show that
I = (Cn + Dn ζ(2))d−2
n

for some integers Cn , Dn .

(4) Show that
∫ 1∫
n
1
y n (1 − y)n xn (1 − x)n
I = (−1) dxdy
0 0 (1 − xy)n+1
and that (√ )5
y(1 − y)x(1 − x) 5−1
≤ ,
1 − xy 2
for all 0 ≤ x ≤ 1, 0 ≤ y ≤ 1.
(6) Show that
(√ )5n ( )n
5−1 5
0 < |Cn + Dn ζ(2)| < d2n ζ(2) <
2 6

(7) Prove that ζ(2) is irrational.

The dead line of report is 1st February 2018

References –14–
[A] R. Apéry, Irrationalité de ζ(2) et ζ(3), Astérisque 61 (1979), 11–13.
[B] F. Beukers, A note on the irrationality of ζ(2) and ζ(3), Bull. London
Math. Soc. 11 (1979), 268–272.
[vdP] A. van der Poorten, A proof that Euler missed...Apéry’s proof of the
irrationality of ζ(3), The Mathematical Intelligencer, 1(1979), 195–203,