-2

Can you please help me in the step-by-step calculation of this improper intergal?

$$\int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{x^2 \ln x}{e^x-1} \ \mathrm d x$$

I can solve a similar integral where I replaced $\ln(x)$ with $x$. So the integral becomes, $$\int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{x^3}{e^x-1} \ \mathrm d x$$ $$=\int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{x^3e^{-x} }{1-e^{-x} } \ \mathrm d x$$ so that $$=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \int_{0}^{\infty}x^3e^{-x(n+1) }\mathrm d x$$ $$=Γ(3+1)\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \frac{1}{(n+1)^{3+1}}$$ $$=Γ(4)ζ(4)$$ $$=6\frac{π^4}{90}$$ $$\approx 6.493$$

Thank you in advance for your detailled explanation and derivation.

  • 1
    Can you clarify the step when $ln(x)$ becomes $x$ ? – Atmos Sep 06 '21 at 14:50
  • 1
    Do you want to prove that the integral converges? or are you trying to evaluate the exact value? And well, $log (x+1)$ can be approximate with $x$ only around $x=0$ – Naj Kamp Sep 06 '21 at 14:52
  • 2
    Hello and welcome to math.stackexchange. You have computed a different integral from the one you started with, using correct steps. To make this approach work for the integral in the title, do not approximate $\ln x \approx x$, but rather keep the logarithmic term. – Hans Engler Sep 06 '21 at 14:53
  • @RounakSarkar Yeah, its not a great situation. (I suggest you delete your answer and wait for it all to get fixed. Or something.) – user1729 Sep 06 '21 at 15:23
  • @user1729 The link you provided does not have a single posted solution. – Mark Viola Sep 06 '21 at 15:47
  • That's from the same OP, @MarkViola (In general, one cannot close as duplicate if the target has no answer) – Arctic Char Sep 06 '21 at 15:52
  • @ArcticChar Ah. I see. – Mark Viola Sep 06 '21 at 15:54
  • 3
    @MarkViola This question is simply a repost of the users closed question. Which the user should not have done. (I should probably have edited this into my original comment, but it was automated...) – user1729 Sep 06 '21 at 15:57
  • @user1729 The OP added considerably more including his/her attempt. – Mark Viola Sep 06 '21 at 15:58
  • 2
    @MarkViola Their attempt is of a completely different question! But more than that: they should have improved the original question rather than reposting it. – user1729 Sep 06 '21 at 16:00
  • @user1729 That is inaccurate. The OP mistakenly has expanded $\log(x)$ using the first term only in its Taylor series. While this is blatantly wrong, it is nevertheless an attempt. So, I believe that this is not a "low quality" question. – Mark Viola Sep 06 '21 at 16:33
  • 2
    @MarkViola But you are missing the point: they reposted a question which was closed and instead they should have improved the original, essentially cheating the system. – user1729 Sep 06 '21 at 16:36
  • 1
    @user1729 No, I'm not missing that. I just don't believe that it is relevant. The original question was closed without a single answer posted. So, asking the same question with improved context seems fine to me. – Mark Viola Sep 06 '21 at 16:38
  • 7
    @MarkViola It is absolutely relevant. If a question is closed, the correct course of action is to improve the question and lobby to have it reopened. Reposting the same question again is inappropriate, even if it has been improved. – Xander Henderson Sep 06 '21 at 16:49
  • 1
    @XanderHenderson I don't agree with that policy. – Mark Viola Sep 06 '21 at 16:56
  • 5
    You are welcome to disagree, but it is the policy. – Xander Henderson Sep 06 '21 at 17:03
  • 7
    It is also worth noting that encouraging users to repost poorly received questions likely does more harm to that user than good. The original question, which has a relatively large negative score, has been deleted. This question now also has a relatively large negative score. Both questions will be used by the automatic algorithm which gives out question bans for low quality contributions. Reposting a poorly received question makes it more likely that a user will be banned from asking questions. – Xander Henderson Sep 06 '21 at 17:07

2 Answers2

4

We know that,

$\displaystyle{\Gamma(u)\zeta(u)=\int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{x^{u-1}}{e^x-1}dx}$

Now if we differentiate both sides then we get,

$\displaystyle \Gamma^{\prime}(u)\zeta(u)+\Gamma(u)\zeta^{\prime}(u) =\int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{x^{u-1}\ln(x)}{e^x-1}dx.$

So, finally if we let $u=3$ then,

$\displaystyle\int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{x^2\ln(x)}{e^x-1}dx=\Gamma^{\prime}(3)\zeta(3)+2\zeta^{\prime}(3)$, or $\approx 1.82223...$.

I am not sure if there are any closed forms of $\Gamma^{\prime}(3)$ and $\zeta^{\prime}(3)$. If there are then please tell me in the comments, I would edit my answer.

Edit:-

As said in the comments, we can write $\Gamma^{\prime}(3)=3-2\gamma$. So simplifying further we get,

$$\int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{x^2\ln(x)}{e^x-1}dx=2\zeta^{\prime}(3)+3\zeta(3)-2\gamma\zeta(3)$$

amWhy
  • 209,954
  • 3
    $\Gamma'(3)=\Gamma(3)\psi(3)$ and $\psi(3)=-\gamma+\sum_{n=1}^\infty \left(\frac1n-\frac1{n+2}\right)=-\gamma+3/2$ – Mark Viola Sep 06 '21 at 16:43
1

Evaluating the Frullani integral

$$\log(x)=\int_0^\infty \frac{e^{-t}-e^{-xt}}{t}\,dt$$

and writing $\frac1{e^x-1}=\sum_{n=1}^\infty e^{-nx}$

we can write

$$\begin{align} \int_0^\infty \frac{x^2\log(x)}{e^x-1}\,dx&=\sum_{n=1}^\infty \int_0^\infty \frac1t\int_0^\infty x^2(e^{-t}-e^{-xt})e^{-nx}\,dx\,dt\\\\ &=2\sum_{n=1}^\infty \int_0^\infty \frac1t \left(\frac{e^{-t}}{n^3}-\frac{1}{(n+t)^3}\right)\,dt\\\\ &=2\sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac1{n^3}\int_0^\infty \frac1t\left(e^{-nt}-\frac{1}{(t+1)^3}\right)\,dt\\\\ &=2\sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac1{n^3}\int_0^\infty \frac1t\left(e^{-nt}-e^{-t}+e^{-t}-\frac{1}{(t+1)^3}\right)\\\\ &=2\zeta'(3)+2\zeta(3)\int_0^\infty \frac1t\left(e^{-t}-\frac{1}{(t+1)^3}\right)\,dt\\\\ &=2\zeta'(3) +(3-2\gamma)\zeta(3) \end{align}$$

where we evaluated the integral $\int_0^\infty \frac1t\left(e^{-t}-\frac{1}{(t+1)^3}\right)\,dt$ by integrating by parts.

Mark Viola
  • 179,405
  • 1
    I would say that you are going unnecessarily complicated, but still it is a new way derive the answer. +1 for that. – Rounak Sarkar Sep 06 '21 at 15:50
  • @RounakSarkar Thank you for the up vote! Much appreciated. But just curious ... What is unnecessarily complicated? I used a Frullani integral and a geometric series expansion; that's easy. And I did not rely on previously tabulated results. – Mark Viola Sep 06 '21 at 15:54
  • I think it is just subjective to me. I have never heard of Frullani and the computations are a little longer. I mean there is nothing innately complicated here. – Rounak Sarkar Sep 06 '21 at 16:00