1

2 Journal of Integer Sequences, Vol. 26 (2023),

3
47 6
Article 23.3.6
23 11

On Sándor’s Inequality for the Riemann Zeta Function

Horst Alzer
Morsbacher Straße 10
51545 Waldbröl
Germany
[email protected]

Man Kam Kwong

Department of Applied Mathematics
The Hong Kong Polytechnic University
Hunghom, Hong Kong
[email protected]

Abstract
Let ω(n) denote the number of distinct prime factors of n. We prove an analogue
of a recently published inequality of Sándor that relates a series involving ω(n) to a
quotient of zeta functions.

1 Introduction and statement of the main results

The classical Riemann zeta function is defined for real numbers s > 1 by
∞
X 1 Y 1
ζ(s) = = .
n=1
ns p prime 1 − p−s

There are several Dirichlet series whose coefficients are arithmetical functions which can be
expressed in terms of the zeta function. As an example we have the elegant identity
∞
ζ 2 (s) X 2ω(n)
= , s > 1, (1)
ζ(2s) n=1 ns

1
where ω(n) denotes the number of distinct prime factors of n; see Apostol [1, p. 247], Hardy
and Wright [2, p. 265]. The additive analogues of (1),
∞
X ζn (s)
ζ 2 (s) + ζ(2s) = 2 , s > 1,
n=1
ns

and ∞
2
X ζn−1 (s)
ζ (s) − ζ(2s) = 2 , s > 1,
n=2
ns
where ζm (s) = m s
P
k=1 1/k , are due to Hassani and Rahimpour [3].
In 2018, Sándor [5] provided an interesting counterpart of (1),
∞
X λω(n) ζ λ (s)
< , λ > 2, s > 1. (2)
n=1
ns ζ(λs)

Two questions arise naturally. Is there a similar inequality which offers an upper bound
for ζ λ (s)/ζ(λs)? Do there exist related results for real parameters λ with 1 < λ < 2? The
aim of this note is to give affirmative answers to both questions.
Our first theorem presents a complement of (2).
Theorem 1. For all real numbers λ > 2 and s > 1, we have
∞
ζ λ (s) X (2λ − 2)ω(n)
< . (3)
ζ(λs) n=1 ns

Next, we provide upper and lower bounds for ζ λ (s)/ζ(λs) which are valid for all real
numbers λ with 1 < λ < 2.
Theorem 2. Let 1 < λ < 2 and s > 1. Then
∞ ∞
X (2λ − 2)ω(n) ζ λ (s) X λω(n)
s
< < s
. (4)
n=1
n ζ(λs) n=1
n

In the next section, we collect three lemmas. The proofs of the two theorems are given
in Section 3.

2 Lemmas
A proof of the first lemma can be found in Hardy and Wright [2, p. 249].
f (n)/ns
P∞
Lemma 3. Let f be a multiplicative arithmetical function with f (1) = 1 such that n=1
is absolutely convergent. Then
∞
X f (n) Y  f (p) f (p2 ) 
s
= 1 + s
+ 2s
+ · · · .
n=1
n p prime
p p

2
 The next lemma might be known. Since we cannot give a reference, we include a proof.
Lemma 4. Let a > 0 and s > 1 be real numbers. The series
∞
X aω(n)
(5)
n=1
ns

is convergent.
Proof. Let s > 1. From (1) we conclude that if 0 < a ≤ 2, then the series is convergent.
Next, let a > 2. A result of Robin [4] states that there exists a number b ≈ 1.384 such that
log n
ω(n) ≤ b , n ≥ 3.
log log n
This leads to
aω(n) ab log n/ log log n
≤ , n ≥ 3. (6)
ns ns
Moreover, there exists a positive integer m such that
ab log n/ log log n 1
s
≤ (s+1)/2 , n ≥ m. (7)
n n
From (6) and (7) we conclude that the series in (5) is convergent.
Lemma 5. Let c and x be real numbers.

(i) If 1 < c < 2 and 0 < x < 1/2, then

1 + (2c − 3)x 1 − xc 1 + (c − 1)x
< c
< . (8)
1−x (1 − x) 1−x

(ii) If c > 2 and 0 < x < 1/2, then (8) holds with “>” instead of “<”.
Proof. Let c > 0 and 0 < x < 1. We define
1 − xc
uc (x) = ,
(1 − x)c−1
uc (x) − 1
vc (x) = ,
x
wc (x) = xu′c (x) − uc (x) + 1.

Then

x2 vc′ (x) = wc (x),

(c − 1)cx(1 − xc−2 )
wc′ (x) = xu′′c (x) = .
(1 − x)c+1

3
 (i) Let 1 < c < 2 and 0 < x < 1/2. Then wc′ (x) < 0. Thus,

wc (x) < wc (0) = 0.

It follows that

2c − 3 = vc (1/2) < vc (x) < vc (0) = u′c (0) = c − 1.

This implies (8).

(ii) Let c > 2 and 0 < x < 1/2. Then wc′ (x) > 0 and wc (x) > wc (0) = 0. This gives

vc (0) < vc (x) < vc (1/2)

which is equivalent to (8) with “>” instead of “<”.

3 Proof of the theorems

Proof. We follow the method of proof given in [5]. Let a > 0 and s > 1. For positive
integers n, we define
Fa (n) = aω(n) .
Since
ω(1) = 0 and ω(mn) = ω(m) + ω(n), gcd(m, n) = 1,
we obtain
Fa (1) = 1 and Fa (mn) = Fa (m)Fa (n), gcd(m, n) = 1.
From Lemma 3 and Lemma 4 we get
∞
X Fa (n) Y  Fa (p) Fa (p2 ) 
= 1+ + + ··· . (9)
n=1
ns p prime
ps p2s

We have ∞ ∞ ∞
Fa (pn ) aω(p )
n
X X X a p−s
= = = a . (10)
n=1
pns n=1
pns n=1
p ns 1 − p −s

(i) Let 1 < λ < 2. Using (9), (10) and Lemma 5, part (i) with x = p−s yields
∞
X (2λ − 2)ω(n) Y 1 + (2λ − 3)p−s Y 1 − p−sλ
= < (11)
n=1
ns p prime
1 − p−s p prime
(1 − p−s )λ

4
 and ∞
X λω(n) Y 1 + (λ − 1)p−s Y 1 − p−sλ
= > . (12)
n=1
ns p prime
(1 − p−s )λ p prime
(1 − p−s )λ
From (11), (12) and
Y 1 Y 1
ζ λ (s) = , ζ(λs) = (13)
p prime
(1 − p−s )λ p prime
1 − p−λs

we conclude that (4) is valid.

(ii) Let λ > 2. We apply Lemma 5, part (ii) with x = p−s , then we obtain (11) with “>”
instead of “<”. Using this result and (13) leads to (3).

References
[1] T. M. Apostol, Introduction to Analytic Number Theory, Springer, 1976.
[2] G. H. Hardy and E. M. Wright, An Introduction to the Theory of Numbers, 4th Ed.,
Oxford University Press, 1959.
[3] M. Hassani and S. Rahimpour, L-Summing method, RGMIA Research Report Collection
7(4) (2004), article 10.
[4] G. Robin, Estimation de la fonction de Tchebychef θ sur le k-ième nombre premier et
grandes valeurs de la fonction ω(n) nombre de diviseurs premiers de n, Acta Arith. 42
(1983), 367–389.
[5] J. Sándor, An inequality involving a ratio of zeta functions, Notes Number Th. Disc.
Math. 24 (2018), 92–94.

2020 Mathematics Subject Classification: Primary 11M06; Secondary 11B83, 26D15.

Keywords: Riemann zeta function, prime omega function, inequality.

(Concerned with sequence A129251.)

Received January 8 2023; revised versions received March 3 2023; March 5 2023. Published
in Journal of Integer Sequences, March 16 2023.

Return to Journal of Integer Sequences home page.