The series which we propose to investigate in this treatise can be regarded as a function of four quantities
which we shall call its elements. We will distinguish these by their order, with the first element being
the second
the third
and the fourth
It is clear that the first and second elements can be interchanged: therefore, if for the sake of brevity we denote our series by the symbol
then we shall have
By assigning definite values to the elements
our series becomes a function of a single variable
which is clearly cut off after the
or
term if
or
is a negative integer, but in other cases it extends indefinitely. In the former case, the series yields a rational algebraic function, but in the latter case, it usually yields a transcendental function. The third element
must neither be a negative integer nor equal to zero, so that we do not have infinitely large terms.
The coefficients of the powers
in our series are as
and therefore they approach equality as the value of
increases. So, if a definite value is also assigned to the fourth element
the convergence or divergence of the series will depend on the nature of this value. Indeed, whenever a real value, positive or negative but less than unity, is assigned to
the series, while not convergent immediately from the beginning, will nevertheless converge after a certain interval and will lead to a sum which is finite and determinate. The same will occur for an imaginary value of
of the form
whenever
On the other hand, for a real value of
greater than unity, or for an imaginary value of the form
with
the series will diverge, perhaps not immediately, but after a certain interval, so that it is meaningless to speak of its "sum". Finally, for the value
(or more generally for a value of the form
with
), the convergence or divergence of the series will depend on the nature of the elements
as we will discuss, with particular attention to the sum of the series for
in the third section.
It is therefore clear that, to the extent that our function is defined as the sum of a definite series, our investigation must, by its nature, be restricted to those cases where the series actually converges, and hence it is meaningless to ask for the value of the series for values of
which are greater than unity. Furthermore, from the fourth section onwards, we will construct our function on the basis of a deeper principle, which permits the most general application.
Differentiation of our series, considering only the fourth element
as the variable, leads to a similar function, since it is clear that
The same applies to repeated differentiation.
It will be worth our while to include here certain functions that can be reduced to our series and whose use is very common in analysis.

where the element
is arbitrary.
where
is an infinitely small quantity.




where
is the base of the hyperbolic logarithm, and
is an infinitely large number.
where
are infinitely large numbers.













The preceding functions are algebraic or transcendental depending upon logarithms and the circle. However, we do not undertake our general investigation for the sake of these functions, but rather to advance the theory of higher transcendental functions, of which our series encompasses a vast range. Among these, amid countless others, are the coefficients which arise in the expansion of the function
into a series in terms of the cosines of the angles
etc., about which we will speak particularly on another occasion. However, those coefficients can be reduced to the form of our series in several ways. Namely, setting
we have "firstly",

For if we view
as the product of
and
(where
denotes the quantity
), then
is equal to the product of
with
and
Since this must be identical to
the values given above are obtained automatically.
Secondly, we have

These values are easily derived from
Thirdly,

Finally fourthly,

These values and those following are easily derived from
FIRST SECTION.
Relations between contiguous functions.
7.
We say that a function is contiguous with
if it is obtained from the latter by increasing or decreasing the first, second, or third element by unity, with the remaining three elements being held constant. Thus the primary function
produces six contiguous ones, any two of which are related to the primary function by a very simple linear equation. These equations, fifteen in number, are given below. For the sake of brevity we have omitted the fourth element, which is always understood to be
and we have denoted the primary function simply by
| [1]
|
|
| [2]
|
|
| [3]
|
|
| [4]
|
|
| [5]
|
|
| [6]
|
|
| [7]
|
|
| [8]
|
|
| [9]
|
|
| [10]
|
|
| [11]
|
|
| [12] |
|
| [13] |
|
| [14] |
|
| [15] |
|
Now here is the proof of these formulas. If we set
then the coefficient of
will be as follows:
in  |
|
in  |
|
in  |
|
in  |
|
Moreover, the coefficient of
in
, or the coefficient of
in
is
Hence, the truth of formulas 5 and 3 is immediately apparent. Formula 12 arises from 5 by swapping
and
and from these two, elimination yields 2. Similarly, by the same permutation, formula 6 arises from 3; combining 6 and 12 yields 9, permuting yields 14, and combining these gives 7. Finally, from 2 and 6, 1 is derived, and then by permutation, 10. Formula 8 can be derived in a similar manner to formulas 5 and 3 above, from the consideration of coefficients (if desired, all 15 formulas could be derived in a similar way), or more elegantly from the known equations, as follows.
By changing the element
to
and
to
in formula 5, we obtain
On the other hand, by changing only
to
in formula 9, we get
Subtracting these formulas immediately yields 8, and hence by permutation, 13. From 1 and 8, 4 follows, and then by permutating, 11. Finally, 15 is deduced from 8 and 9.
If
and
are all integers (positive or negative), one can go from the function
to the function
, and likewise from there to the function
through a series of similar functions, such that each one is contiguous to the preceding and succeeding ones. This is achieved by changing one element, e.g.
, by one unit repeatedly, until one reaches
and then changing the second element until one reaches
and finally changing the third element until one reaches
and so on to
Since linear equations exist, according to art. 7, between the first, second, and third functions, and generally between any three consecutive functions in this series, it is easily understood that linear equations between the functions
and so forth can be deduced by elimination. Thus, generally speaking, from two functions whose first three elements differ by integers, any other function with the same property can be obtained, provided that the fourth element remains the same. For what remains, it suffices to establish this remarkable truth generally; we shall not dwell on the shortcuts by which the operations required for this purpose can be made as brief as possible.
Suppose that we are given e.g. the functions
between which a linear relation must be found. We can connect them through the following contiguous functions:
Thus we have five linear equations (from formulas 6, 13, 5 of art. 7):





Eliminating
from I and II yields

Eliminating
from this and III yields

Eliminating
from IV and V yields

Finally, eliminating
from this and VII yields

If we wanted to exhaust all relations among triplets of functions
where
are either
or
then the number of formulas would increase to 325. Such a collection would not be useless; but it will suffice to present only a few here. These can be easily demonstrated, either from the formulas in art. 7 or, if one prefers, in the same manner as in art. 8.
| [16]
|
|
|
| [17]
|
|
|
| [18]
|
|
|
| [19]
|
|
|
| [20]
|
|
|
| [21]
|
|
|
| [22]
|
|
|
| [23]
|
|
|
SECOND SECTION.
Continued Fractions.
12.
Denoting
\frac{F(\alpha, \beta+1, \gamma+1, x)}{F(\alpha, \beta, \gamma, x)}\;</math>
by
we have
and thus, dividing equation 19 by
or
| [24]
|
|
and since similarly
etc., we obtain the following continued fraction for
| [25]
|
|
where
etc., where the law of the progression is obvious.
Moreover, from equations 17, 18, 21, 22, we have
| [26]
|
|
| [27]
|
|
| [28]
|
|
| [29]
|
|
from which, substituting the values of the function
into the continued fractions, an equal number of new continued fractions emerge.
Finally, it is clear that the continued fraction in formula 25 automatically terminates if any of the numbers
is a negative integer, and otherwise it runs to infinity.
The continued fractions in the previous article are of the utmost importance, and it can be asserted that hardly any continued fractions progressing according to a known law have so far been extracted by analysts, which are not special cases of ours. Especially notable is the case where we set
in formula 25, so that
and therefore, writing
instead of

where
etc.
It will be worth our while to include some special cases here. Setting
it follows from formula I of art. 5 that
| [31]
|
|
From formulas VI and VII of art. 5, we have
| [32]
|
|
| [33]
|
|
Changing the sign
to
here yields the continued fraction for
Furthermore, we have
| [34]
|
|
| [35]
|
|
Setting
the continued fraction presented in art. 90 of Theoria motus corporum coelestium follows automatically from formula 30. Two other continued fractions are also proposed there, the development of which we thought to supply here. Setting
then (l.c.)
hence
which is the first formula; the second is derived as follows. Setting
we have, by formula 25,
and
Hence
or by swapping the first and second elements,
However, by equation 21, we have
from which it follows that
and substituting this value into the formula above yields
which is the second formula.
Setting
in formula 30 yields, for an infinitely large value of
| [36]
|
|
|
|
|
THIRD SECTION.
On the sum of our series, with the fourth element set
with a discussion of certain other transcendental functions.
15.
Whenever the elements
are all positive quantities, all coefficients of powers of the fourth element
become positive: and whenever one or another of those elements is negative, at least from some power
onwards all coefficients will have the same sign, provided that
is taken greater than the absolute value of the most negative element. It is clear from this that the sum of the series for
cannot be finite unless the coefficients decrease to infinity after a certain term, or, to speak in the manner of analysts, unless the coefficient of the term
is
Indeed, for the benefit of those who favor the rigorous methods of the ancient geometers, we will show with all rigor that
first, the coefficients (since the series is not terminated) increase to infinity indefinitely whenever
is a positive quantity.
second, the coefficients converge continually towards a finite limit whenever
third, the coefficients decrease to infinity indefinitely whenever
is a negative quantity.
fourth, the sum of our series for
notwithstanding convergence in the third case, is infinite whenever
is a positive quantity or
fifth, the sum is truly finite whenever
is a negative quantity.
We will apply this general discussion to the infinite series
etc., which is formed so that the quotients
etc. resp. are the values of the fraction
for
, etc. For brevity, we will denote the numerator of this fraction by
and the denominator by
. Furthermore, we assume that
and
are not identical, or equivalently that the differences
etc., do not all vanish simultaneously.
I. Whenever the first of the differences
etc., which does not vanish is positive, some limit
can be assigned, beyond which the values of the functions
and
will always be positive and
. It is evident that this occurs when
is taken as the largest real root of the equation
if this equation has no real roots at all, then this property holds for all values of
. Therefore, in the series
etc., at least after a certain interval (if not from the beginning), all terms will be positive and greater than unity. Consequently, if none of them tends to zero or infinity, it is clear that
the series
etc., if not from the beginning, then at least after a certain interval, will have all its terms affected by the same sign and continually increasing.
By the same reasoning, if the first of the differences
etc. which does not vanish is negative, then the series
etc., will, if not from the beginning, then at least after a certain interval, have all its terms affected by the same sign and continually decreasing.
II. Now, if the coefficients
are unequal, the terms of the series
etc., will either increase or decrease to infinity, depending on whether the difference
is positive or negative: we demonstrate this as follows. If
is positive, let an integer
be chosen so that
and let
, etc., and also
Then it is clear that
etc., are values of the fraction
when
, etc., while
themselves are algebraic functions of the form
Therefore, since by hypothesis the difference
is positive, the terms of the series
etc. will, if not from the beginning, then after a certain interval, continually increase (by I). Hence the terms of the series
etc., will necessarily increase beyond all limits, and therefore the terms of the series
, etc., whose exponents are equal to
, will do so as well. Q.E.D.
If
is negative, then the integer
must be chosen so that
is greater than
, and similar reasoning leads to the conclusion that the terms of the series
will continually decrease after a certain interval. Therefore, the terms of the series
etc., and consequently also the terms of the series
, etc., will necessarily tend to infinity. Q.E.S.
III. On the other hand, if the coefficients
are equal, then the terms of the series
etc., converge continually to a finite limit: we demonstrate this as follows. First, let us suppose that the terms of the series increase continually after a certain interval, or equivalently that the first of the differences
etc. which does not vanish is positive. Let
be an integer such that
becomes a positive quantity. Set
and
such that
, etc., are values of the fraction
when
, etc. Therefore, since we have
and since
is a negative quantity by hypothesis, the terms of the series
etc., will decrease continually after a certain interval. Therefore, the corresponding terms of the series
etc. which are always smaller, while also increasing continually, must converge to a finite limit. Q.E.D.
If the terms of the series
etc., decrease continually after a certain interval, an integer
must be chosen such that
becomes a positive quantity. It then becomes evident from entirely similar reasoning that the terms of the series
increase continually after a certain interval. Therefore, the corresponding terms of the series
etc., which are always greater, while also decreasing continually, must converge to a finite limit. Q.E.S.
IV. Lastly, concerning the sum of the series whose terms are
etc. in the case where these terms decrease indefinitely, let us first suppose that
falls between
and
, meaning that
is either a positive quantity or
Let
be a positive integer, chosen arbitrarily in the case where
is positive, or so that it makes the quantity
positive in the case where
Then we will have
where either
is positive, or, if it equals
then at least
will be positive. Hence (by I), a value
can be assigned to the quantity
, which, once exceeded, will ensure that the values of the fraction
will always be positive and greater than unity. Let
be an integer greater than
and also greater than
and let the terms of the series
etc., corresponding to the values
etc., be denoted by
etc. Then
will be positive quantities greater than one, so that
Consequently, the sum of the series
will be greater than the sum of the series
no matter how many terms are included. However, as the number of terms increases indefinitely, the latter series exceeds all limits, as the sum of the series
is known to be infinite and remains infinite even if the terms
are removed from the beginning. Hence, the sum of the series
and consequently the sum of
of which it is a part, increases beyond all limits.
V. However, when
is a negative quantity that is absolutely greater than one, the sum of the series
will certainly be finite when continued indefinitely. Indeed, let
be a positive quantity less than
Then similar reasoning shows that the quantity
can be assigned a value
beyond which the fraction
always has positive values less than unity. Now, if we take an integer
greater than
and let the terms of the series
etc., corresponding to the values
etc., be denoted by
etc., then
Consequently, the sum of the series
no matter how many terms are included, is less than the product of
with the sum of the same number of terms of the series
However, the sum of this series can be easily found for any number of terms. In particular,
| The first term
|
|
| The sum of the first two terms
|
|
| The sum of the first three terms
|
etc.
|
and since the second part (by II) forms a series which decreases beyond all limits, the sum must be
Hence
when continued infinitely, will always remain less than
and thus
will certainly converge to a finite sum. Q.E.D.
VI. In order to apply those general assertions concerning the series
etc. to the coefficients of the powers
etc. in the series
it is necessary to set
from which the five assertions in the preceding article follow automatically.
Therefore, investigations of the nature of the sum of the series
are naturally restricted to the case where
is a positive quantity, in which case the sum will always be a finite quantity. However, we must begin with the following observation. If, after a certain term, the coefficients of the series
decrease beyond all limits, then the product
must
when for
even if the sum of the series
becomes infinitely large. For since the sum of two terms is
the sum of three is
the sum of four is
, etc., the limit of the sum when continued indefinitely will be
Therefore, whenever
is a positive quantity, we must have
for
and hence, by equation 15 of art. 7,
|
|
or
|
| [37]
|
|
Thus, similarly, we have
and so on, where
denotes an arbitrary positive integer,
the product of
with 
and 
divided by the product of

with
We now introduce the notation
| [38]
|
|
where
is naturally restricted to be a positive integer, and with this restriction,
represents a function determined solely by the two quantities
and
. Then it is easy to understand that the theorem proposed at the end of the preceding article can be expressed as follows:
| [39]
|
|
It will be worthwhile to examine the nature of the function
in more detail. Whenever
is a negative integer, the function evidently has an infinitely large value, as long as a sufficiently large value is assigned to
. For non-negative integer values of
, we have:
etc., and generally:
| [40]
|
|
For arbitrary values of
, we have:
| [41]
|
|
| [42]
|
|
and therefore, since
| [43]
|
|
It is worth giving special attention to the limit toward which the function \Pi(k, z) continually converges, as k increases to infinity. First, let
be a finite value of
which is greater than
. Then it is clear that, as
increases from
to
the logarithm of
receives an increment which can be expressed by the following convergent series:
Therefore, as
increases from
to
the logarithm of
will receive an increment
which will always remain finite, even when
tends to infinity, as can be easily demonstrated. Therefore, unless an infinite factor is already present in
i.e., unless
is a negative integer, the limit of
as
tends to infinity will certainly be a finite quantity. Hence, it is evident that
depends solely on
or in other words, it is a function of
alone, which we will simply denote by
We therefore define the function
as the value of the product:
for
or, if one prefers, as the limit of the infinite product
Immediately following from equation 41, we have the fundamental equation:
| [44]
|
|
Hence, in general, for any positive integer
| [45]
|
|
For a negative integer value of
the value of the function
will be infinitely large; for non-negative integer values, we have
and, in general
| [46]
|
|
|
However, this property of our function should not be mistaken as its definition, as it is inherently limited to integer values and there exist countless other functions (e.g.,
, etc., where
denotes the circumference of a circle of radius
) that share the same property.
Although the function
may appear to be more general than
it will henceforth be redundant for us, as it can easily be reduced to the latter. Indeed, it follows from the combination of equations 38, 45, and 46 that
| [47]
|
|
Moreover, the connection of these functions with that which Kramp has called "facultates numericae" is evident. Specifically, the facultates numericae, which this author denotes by
, can be expressed in our notation as:
However, it seems more advisable to introduce a function of one variable into the analysis, rather than a function of three variables, especially when the latter can be reduced to the former.
The continuity of the function
is interrupted whenever its value becomes infinitely large, i.e., for negative integer values of
Therefore, it will be positive from
to
and since for each limit
obtains an infinitely large value, there will be a minimum value between them, which we found to be
corresponding to the value
Between the limits
and
the value of the function
is negative, between
and
it is positive again, and so forth, as follows from equation 44. Furthermore, it is clear that if one knows all the values of the function
between two arbitrary limits that differ by unity, e.g. from
to
then the value of the function for any other real value of
can be easily deduced from equation 45. To this end, we constructed a table, appended to this section, which gives the Briggsian logarithms of the function
to twenty figures, from
to
However, it should be noted that the final twentieth figure may be subject to an error of one or two units.
Since the limit of the function
as
increases to infinity is clearly unity, equation 39 transforms into the following:
| [48]
|
|
This formula provides the complete solution to the question posed in this section. The following elegant equations follow automatically:
| [49]
|
|
| [50]
|
|
| [51]
|
|
In the first equation,
must be a positive quantity, and so must be
in the second and
in the third.
Let us apply formula 48 to some of the equations from art. 5. By setting
in Formula XIII, we find that
, which is equivalent to the well-known equation
Therefore, since formula 48 gives us
, and since
,
, we have
, or
| [52]
|
|
| [53]
|
|
Formula XVI of art. 5, which is equivalent to the well-known equation
holds generally for any value of
, as long as
remains between the limits
and
. For
, we have
and from this we derive the elegant formula
or setting
,
| [54]
|
|
| [55]
|
|
and writing
for
| [56]
|
|
From formula 54, combined with the definition of the function
, it follows that
is the limit of the product
as
tends to infinity, and therefore
Similarly, from 56, we deduce
These are well-known formulas, that have been derived by analysts using entirely different methods.
Let
be an integer. Then the value of expression
is found to be
Thus it is independent of
, or remains the same regardless of the value assigned to
. Therefore, since
, it is given by the product
As
increases to infinity, we obtain
According to formula 55, the product on the right, when multiplied by itself with order of the factors reversed, yields
Hence, we have the elegant theorem
| [57]
|
|
The integral
taken in such a way that it vanishes for
can be expressed by the following series, provided that
are positive quantities:
Hence its value for
will be
From this theorem, all the relations that the illustrious Euler once painstakingly developed emerge naturally. Thus, by setting e.g.
we have
and thus
Furthermore, it follows from this, since
that
The numerical value of
computed by Stirling is
and the value of
according to the same author, is
while from our own calculation, employing a particular method, it is
In general, it can be easily shown that the value of the function
, if
is a rational quantity
where
are integers, can be deduced from
values of such integrals evaluated at
, and indeed in many different ways. Indeed, taking an integer value for
and a fraction with denominator
for
the value of that integral is always reduced to three
, where
is a fraction with a denominator
any such
can be reduced to
or to
or to
etc., or to
by formula 45, if
is a fraction; for indeed, if
is an integer, then
itself is known. From those values of the integrals, generally speaking, any
can be obtained by elimination, provided that
[1] Indeed, it suffices to take half as many integrals if we also invoke formula 54. Thus, setting e.g.
we will have
Therefore, since
we have
Formulas 54, 55 still yield

so that two integrals
and
or
and
suffice to compute all values of
etc.
Setting
and
the value of the integral
from
to
or the value of the integral
between the same limits, is 
(form. 47), provided that
is an integer. Now, the limit of
as
increases to infinity will be
and the limit of
will be
where
denotes the base of the hyperbolic logarithm. Therefore, if
is positive, the value of the integral
from
to
will be
or
or by writing
for
the value of the integral
from
to
will be
provided that
is a positive quantity.
More generally, by setting
the integral
becomes
which, when taken between the limits
and
is expressed by
or in other words,
The value of the integral
from
to
is
provided that both
and
are positive quantities (if either is negative, the value of the integral is
). Thus for e.g.
the value of the integral
is found to be
The illustrious Euler derived, for the sum of logarithms
, the series
where
, etc. are the Bernoulli numbers. Thus, this series evaluates to
although at first glance this conclusion may seem restricted to integer values, upon closer inspection it will be found that the method employed by Euler (Instit. Calc. Diff. Cap. vi. 159) can be applied, at least for positive fractional values, with the same justification as for integers: he assumes only that the function of
to be developed in a series, can be expressed in such a way that its decrement, if
changes to
can be found using Taylor's theorem, and simultaneously that the same decrement is
The former condition relies on the continuity of the function, and therefore does not apply to negative values of
to which it is not permitted to extend the series; however, the latter condition applies generally to the function
without restriction to integer values of
Therefore, we set
| [58]
|
|
From this, since we have
and by setting
in formula 57,
we get
| [59]
|
|
For large values of
these two series converge sufficiently rapidly from the beginning that an approximate and sufficiently exact sum can be conveniently obtained. However, it should be noted that for any given value of
, no matter how large, only limited precision can be achieved, since the Bernoulli numbers constitute a hypergeometric series, and therefore these series, if extended sufficiently far, will certainly turn from convergent to divergent. It cannot be denied that the theory of such divergent series is still fraught with difficulties, which we may discuss in more detail on another occasion.
From formula 38, it follows that
Taking logarithms and expanding into infinite series yields
| [60]
|
|
The series multiplied by
, which, if one prefers, can also be expressed as
consists of a finite number of terms, but as
tends to infinity, it converges to a certain limit, which presents to us a new species of transcendental functions, to be denoted from now on by
.
Furthermore, if we denote the sums of the infinitely extended series

by
etc. respectively (for which it seems less than necessary to introduce functional symbols), we will have
| [61]
|
|
The function
will clearly be the first derivative of the function
and therefore
| [62]
|
|
Similarly, we have
etc.
The function
is almost as remarkable as the function
we will gather here some significant relations pertaining to it. Differentiating equation 44 yields
| [63]
|
|
from which we have
| [64]
|
|
This formula allows us to progress from smaller values of
to larger ones, or to regress from larger values to smaller ones. For larger positive values of
the numerical values of the function are quite conveniently computed by the following formulas, obtained by differentiating equations 58, 59, to which the same considerations apply as in art. 29 regarding formulas 58 and 59.
| [65]
|
|
| [66]
|
|
Thus for
we have calculated
from which we regress to
[2]
For positive integer values of
we generally have
| [67]
|
|
For negative integer values, however, it is clear that
becomes infinitely large.
Formula 55 provides us with
and differentiating this yields
| [68]
|
|
Moreover, from the definition of the function
we generally have
| [69]
|
|
This yields the well-known series
Similarly, by differentiation formula 57, we obtain
| [70]
|
|
and therefore, by setting
,
| [71]
|
}}
|
For example, we have
and thus
Just as in the previous article we reduced
to
and logarithms, so in generally can we reduce
where
are integers with
to
and logarithms. Let us set
and let
be any one of the angles
; then
etc.,
etc.,
etc., and also
etc.
Thus, we have
and by summation,

)
But we generally have, for values of
not greater than unity,
which easily follows from the expansion of
where
denotes the quantity
Hence, the preceding equation becomes
| [72]
|
|
|
|
|
Now, let us set
, etc. up to
and multiply these equations in their respective order by
etc. up to
and add the sum of these products to equation 71:
If we now consider that
where
denotes any one of the numbers
except for
and
for which the sum is
then it will is apparent, after adding these equations and dividing by
that:
| [73]
|

|
The last term of this equation is clearly
the penultimate one
, etc., so that the terms are always equal in pairs, except when
is even, in which case there is a singular term
which is either
for even
or
for odd
. Combining the equation
with equation 73, we obtain, for odd values of
| [74]
|
|
provided that
is a positive integer less than
For even values of
we have
| [75]
|
|
where the upper sign holds for even
and the lower sign holds for odd
. For example, we find:
In fact, upon combining these equations with equation 64, it is evident that
can generally be determined for "arbitrary rational values" of
whether positive or negative, in terms of
and logarithms, which is a most remarkable theorem.
According to art. 28,
represents the value of the integral
from
to
provided that
is a positive quantity. Therefore, differentiating with respect to
we obtain
or
| [76]
|
from to
|
More generally, by setting
and
the value of the integral
from
to
becomes
provided that both
and
are positive quantities, or equal to the same quantity with the opposite sign, in the case where one of
and
is negative.
Not only the product
but also the function
itself can be expressed through a definite integral. Letting
denote a positive integer, it is clear that the value of the integral
from
to
is
Moreover, since the value of the integral
is generally
it will be
between the limits
and
Hence, it is clear that the value of the integral
between the same limits is
which we denote by
Let us break down the integral
into two parts
After the substitution
the first part
becomes
from which it is clear that its value from
to
is equal to the value of the integral
between the same limits, since it is clear that the letter
can be substituted by
under this restriction. Hence the integral
, between the same limits, becomes
Now, by setting
this integral becomes
which therefore, between the limits
and
, must be equal to
However, when
increases to infinity, the limit of
is
the limit of
is
and the limit of
is
or
Therefore, we have
| [77]
|
|
from
to
The definite integrals by which the functions
have been expressed above must be restricted to values of
such that
becomes a positive quantity: this restriction arose naturally from the derivation itself, and indeed it is easily understood that for other values of
those integrals always become infinite, even if the functions
might remain finite. The truth of formula 77 surely requires the same condition, that
be a positive quantity (otherwise, the integral would certainly become infinite, even if the function
remains finite): but at first glance, the deduction of the formula seems to be general and not subject to any restriction. However, upon closer inspection, it is easy to see that this restriction is already inherent in the analysis itself by which the formula was derived. Namely, we tacitly assumed that the integral
which is equal to
has a finite value, a condition that requires
to be a positive quantity. From our analysis, it indeed follows that these two integrals are always equal if the latter is extended from
to
and the former from
to
however small the quantity
may be, as long as it is not equal to zero. But notwithstanding this, in the case where
is not a positive quantity, the two integrals, extended from
to the same limit
do not converge to equality, but rather their difference grows infinitely as
becomes infinitely small. This example shows how much circumspection is needed in dealing with infinite quantities, which in our analytic reasoning are only to be admitted insofar as they can be reduced to the theory of limits.
By setting
it is clear that formula 77 can also be expressed as
|
|
from to
|
| [78]
|
from to
|
(Thus by setting
the value of
in art. 28 becomes
Furthermore, it is clear from formula 77 that
| [79]
|
from to
|
where not only
but also
must be a positive quantity.
In the same formula 77, if we set
where
denotes a positive quantity, we get
and since, for a positive value of
we likewise have
it is clear that
or equivalently,
with all of these integrals being extended from
to
However, by setting
the latter integral can be evaluated "indefinitely"; namely, it is
if it is to vanish for
therefore, since for
we must set
the integral becomes
from
to
a theorem which was formerly deduced by the illustrious Euler using other methods.
- ↑ If we introduce logarithms for the quantities themselves, this elimination need only be applied to linear equations.
- ↑ Since this value differs from the one computed by the renowned Mascheroni in the Notes to Euler's Calculus of Integration, I have encouraged Friedrich Bernhard Gottfried Nicolai, a young man indefatigable in computation, to recalculate it and extend it further. Thus, through double calculation, descending from
and
he found
Credit is also owed to this very skilled calculator for the table appended to the end of this section, which presents the values of the function
to 18 figures (the last of which is uncertain) for all values of
from
to
at each hundredth. However, the methods by which both tables were constructed rely partly on the theorems presented here and partly on specific computational techniques, which I will address on another occasion.