A series of secants
Let . Define by
We take as granted that is holomorphic on .
First we calculate the Fourier transform of .11 1 Elias M. Stein and Rami Shakarchi, Complex Analysis, p. 81, Example 3.
Lemma 1.
For ,
Proof.
Let and define
The poles of are those at which , thus , . Taking to be the contour going from to , from to , from to , and from to , the poles of inside are and . Because , we work out
and
We bound the integrals on the vertical sides as follows. For ,
and, for ,
For ,
and, for ,
Therefore
and likewise
As , each of these tends to . Therefore,
i.e.,
For the top horizontal side,
Writing
this gives us
and so
which is what we wanted to show. ∎
Corollary 2.
For and ,
Proof.
∎
Theorem 3.
For all ,
Proof.
For , we define by
Following Stein and Shakarchi, for , define to be the set of those functions defined on some neighborhood of in such that is holomorphic on the set and for which there is some such that
and we set . The Poisson summation formula22 2 Elias M. Stein and Rami Shakarchi, Complex Analysis, p. 118, Theorem 2.4. states that for ,
For with ,
Let . Because the zeros of are , , the function belongs to . Corollary 2 with gives us
so applying the Poisson summation formula we get
or,
i.e.,
For this reads
But and are holomorphic on , so by analytic continuation this identity is true for all . ∎
Theorem 4.
Proof.
Let and define , which we check belongs to . Corollary 2 with tells us that for ,
Thus the Poisson summation formula gives, as ,
or
For this reads
Now,
so the above states that for , ,
(1) |
We assert that both sides of (1) are holomorphic on , and thus by analytic continuation that (1) is true for all .
Write . For ,
or,
Now,
so,
For ,
For ,
and for ,
It follows that
Using this with (1) yields
proving the claim. ∎
Define by
By proving that is a modular form of weight , it follows that it is constant, and one thus finds that .33 3 Elias M. Stein and Rami Shakarchi, Complex Analysis, p. 304. One reason that is significant is that, for ,
where denotes the number of ways that can be expressed as a sum of two squares. We can write as
Therefore the identity can be written as
We write
where denotes the number of divisors of of the form , and
where denotes the number of divisors of of the form . Thus for ,