v = ComplexExpand[Im[-(Pi^2/12) - ArcSinh[1]*Log[68 - 48*Sqrt[2]] +
I*Pi*Log[3 - 2*Sqrt[2]] - (1/2)*Log[3 - 2*Sqrt[2]]^2 +
4*PolyLog[2, 2 - Sqrt[2]] - PolyLog[2, 3 + 2*Sqrt[2]] - Log[1 +
Sqrt[2]]^2]]
-Im[PolyLog[2, 3 + 2*Sqrt[2]]] + Pi*Log[3 - 2*Sqrt[2]]
Is this number 0? Well,
N[-Im[PolyLog[2, 3 + 2*Sqrt[2]]] + Pi*Log[3 - 2*Sqrt[2]], 100]
N::meprec:Internal precision limit $MaxExtraPrecision = 50. reached
while evaluating =B9 log(3-2 )-Im(Li2(3+2 )). >>
0``147.75234164756424
The answer seems to be yes. But let's perturb it in the complex plane
and take limits in different directions:
Limit[ComplexExpand[-Im[PolyLog[2, 3 + 2*Sqrt[2] + z]] + Pi*Log[3 -
2*Sqrt[2] + z]],
z -> 0, Direction -> -I]
Im[PolyLog[2, 3 + 2*Sqrt[2]]] + Pi*Log[3 - 2*Sqrt[2]]
N[%, 10]
-11.0756671441947228707`10.000000000000004
That's clearly non-zero. While:
Limit[ComplexExpand[-Im[PolyLog[2, 3 + 2*Sqrt[2] + z]] + Pi*Log[3 -
2*Sqrt[2] + z]],
z -> 0, Direction -> I]
Limit::ztest:Unable to decide whether numeric quantities {2 =B9 log
(3-2 )-2 Im(Li2(2 Power(<<2>>)+3))} are equal to zero. Assuming they
are.
0
I believe that (at least in this case) the numerical values of the
functions at points where the functions are discontinuous are defined
by a numerical procedure (as one sided limits) and therefore it is
pointless to ask for a purely symbolic proof of an identity involving
them (by a symbolic proof I mean here one that a CAS can produce
without human help and using only general symbolic identities).
Andrzej Kozlowski
On 7 Jun 2007, at 16:42, dimitris wrote:
> Hello.
>
> The following is part from my answer in another forum.
>
> In[602]:=
> o = -(Pi^2/12) - ArcSinh[1]*Log[68 - 48*Sqrt[2]] + I*Pi*Log[3 -
> 2*Sqrt[2]] - (1/2)*Log[3 - 2*Sqrt[2]]^2 +
> 4*PolyLog[2, 2 - Sqrt[2]] - PolyLog[2, 3 + 2*Sqrt[2]] - Log[1 +
> Sqrt[2]]^2;
>
> In[603]:=
> Developer`ZeroQ[o] (*version 5.2*)
> Out[603]=
> True
>
> However ZeroQ uses internally numerical evaluations so that its
> application can be considered
> as "...an plausibility argument but not a rigorous proof..." (I
> adopted this quote from Daniel Lichtblau).
>
> Can anyone really show within Mathematica that above expression
> simplifies really to 0?
>
> Dimitris
>
>