Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract
We prove, for the first time, a series of four related identities from Ramanujan’s lost
notebook. The identities are connected with third order mock theta functions.
r 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
X
N
qn
2
feðqÞ ¼ ; ð1:1Þ
n¼0 ð1 þ qÞ2 ð1 þ q2 Þ2 ?ð1 þ qn Þ2
X
N
qn
2
e ðqÞ ¼
f ; ð1:2Þ
n¼0
ð1 þ q Þð1 þ q4 Þ?ð1 þ q2n Þ
2
X
N
qn
2
e ðqÞ ¼
c ; ð1:3Þ
n¼1
ð1 qÞð1 q3 Þ?ð1 q2n1 Þ
0001-8708/$ - see front matter r 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.aim.2003.12.007
ARTICLE IN PRESS
H. Yesilyurt / Advances in Mathematics 190 (2005) 278–299 279
X
N
qn
2
e
wðqÞ ¼ : ð1:4Þ
n¼0
ð1 q þ q2 Þð1 q2 þ q4 Þ?ð1 qn þ q2n Þ
Y
N
ða; qÞN ¼ ð1 aqn Þ; jqjo1:
n¼0
Watson [10] proved (1.5) and (1.6). Andrews [1] also gave certain generalizations of
(1.5) and (1.6). Third order mock theta functions are related to the rank of a
partition defined by Dyson [5] as the largest part minus the number of parts. Let us
define Nðm; nÞ as the number of partitions of n with rank m: The generating function
for Nðm; nÞ is given by
XN XN XN
qn
2
The third order mock theta functions defined by (1.1) through (1.4) can be expressed
in terms of this generating function. Third order mock theta functions and their
applications to the rank are detailed by Fine [7]. A comprehensive literature survey
on mock theta functions is given by Andrews [2].
We prove, for the first time, a series of four related identities from Ramanujan’s
lost notebook. These identities are defined and their connections to (1.5) and (1.6)
are given in Section 3. Proofs of these identities are provided in Sections 4–7. In
addition, we will show in Section 8 that one of the identities can be used to prove the
following identity:
ðqÞ2N XN
nq
nðnþ1Þ=2
¼ ð1Þ : ð1:8Þ
ðtÞN ðt1 qÞN n¼N 1 tqn
Identity (1.8) was proved by Evans [6, Eq. (3.1)] following a different approach.
Equality (1.8) is also given in a different form by Ramanujan on p. 59 of the lost
notebook [9]. Partition theory implications of the product
ðqÞN
ðtqÞN ðt1 qÞN
We first recall Ramanujan’s definitions for a general theta function and some of its
important special cases. Set
X
p
f ða; bÞ :¼ anðnþ1Þ=2 bnðn1Þ=2 ; jabjo1: ð2:1Þ
n¼N
f ð1; aÞ ¼ 0 ð2:4Þ
and if n is an integer,
If n ¼ 1; (2.5) becomes
Two other formulas satisfied by f ða; bÞ are [4, p. 46, Entry 30]
The function f ða; bÞ satisfies the well-known Jacobi triple product identity [4, p. 35,
Entry 19]
X
N
cðqÞ :¼ f ðq; q3 Þ ¼ qnðnþ1Þ=2 ¼ ðq; qÞ2N ðq; qÞN ; ð2:11Þ
n¼0
ARTICLE IN PRESS
H. Yesilyurt / Advances in Mathematics 190 (2005) 278–299 281
X
N
f ðqÞ :¼ f ðq; q2 Þ ¼ ð1Þn qnð3n1Þ=2 ¼ ðq; qÞN : ð2:12Þ
n¼N
By using (2.10) and (2.11), and elementary product manipulations, we find that
ðq; qÞ ðq2 ; q2 ÞN
cðqÞ ¼ 2 4 N ¼ ; ð2:13Þ
ðq ; q ÞN ðq; q2 ÞN
ðq; qÞN
jðqÞ ¼ : ð2:14Þ
ðq; qÞN
Other basic properties of the functions j; c; f and w are [4, p. 39, Entry 24]
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
f ðqÞ cðqÞ wðqÞ jðqÞ
¼ ¼ ¼ ; ð2:16Þ
f ðqÞ cðqÞ wðqÞ jðqÞ
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
f ðqÞ 3 jðqÞ jðqÞ f ðq2 Þ
wðqÞ ¼ ¼ ¼ ¼ ; ð2:17Þ
f ðq2 Þ cðqÞ f ðqÞ cðqÞ
fa ðqÞ :¼ ; ð2:21Þ
n¼0
ð1 þ aq þ q2 Þ?ð1 þ aqn þ q2n Þ
Gðt; qÞ :¼ : ð2:22Þ
n¼0
ðtqÞn ðt1 qÞn
For a proof of (2.23) see [7, p. 13, eq. (12.311)]. We need variations of two
representations for Gðt; qÞ due to Fine [7].
ARTICLE IN PRESS
282 H. Yesilyurt / Advances in Mathematics 190 (2005) 278–299
X
N
tn
Gðt; qÞ ¼ ð1 tÞ ð2:24Þ
n¼0
ðt1 qÞn
XN
ðtqÞn
¼ 1 t1 þ t1 : ð2:25Þ
n¼0
ðt1 qÞn
XN
ðaqÞn n
F ða; b; tÞ :¼ t :
n¼0
ðbqÞn
Eq. (2.26) is Eq. (12.3) on p. 13 of [7] with b replaced by t1 ; and (2.27) readily
follows from Eq. (2.4) on p. 2 of [7].
Observe that (2.25) is valid in the region jqjojtjojqj1 : Also as noted by Fine [7,
p. 51, Eq. (25.6)], Gðt; qÞ satisfies a third order q-difference equation. We sketch a
proof here since it is stated without a proof in [7].
Lemma 2.2. For jqjo1 and jqjojtjoj1=qj; Gðt; qÞ satisfies the q-difference equation
1 qt3
Gðtq; qÞ þ Gðt; qÞ ¼ 1 qt2 : ð2:28Þ
1 tq 1t
Proof. Let
XN
ðtqÞn
Mðt; qÞ :¼ ; ð2:29Þ
n¼0
ðt1 qÞn
so that by (2.25),
Now, Lemma 2.2 follows from (2.31) together with (2.30) after rearrangement.
1
V ðt; qÞ :¼ Gðt; qÞ: ð2:32Þ
1t
Lemma 2.2 then takes the following form:
Observe that
The basic property (2.34) will be used many times in the sequel without comment.
The partial fraction decomposition of V ðt; qÞ is given by [8, Eq. (7.10)]
t X N
q3nðnþ1Þ=2
V ðt; qÞ ¼ 1 þ ð1Þn : ð2:35Þ
ðqÞN n¼N 1 tqn
We will need the following lemma due to Atkin and Swinnerton-Dyer [3].
Lemma 2.3. Let q; 0oqo1; be fixed. Suppose that WðzÞ is an analytic function of z;
except for possibly a finite number of poles, in every region, 0oz1 pjzjpz2 :
If
for some integer k (positive, zero, or negative) and some constant A; then either WðzÞ
has k more poles than zeros in the region jqjojzjp1; or WðzÞ vanishes identically.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
284 H. Yesilyurt / Advances in Mathematics 190 (2005) 278–299
We now offer the four identities from Ramanujan’s lost notebook that we plan to
prove.
Entry 3.1 (Ramanujan [9, p. 2, no. 3]). Suppose that a and b are real with a2 þ b2 ¼
4: Then, if fa ðqÞ is defined by (2.21),
baþ2 bþaþ2 b
fa ðqÞ þ fa ðqÞ fb ðqÞ
4 4 2
4 4
ðq ; q ÞN YN n
1 bq þ q 2n
¼ : ð3:1Þ
ðq; q2 ÞN n¼1 1 þ ða2 b2 2Þq4n þ q8n
Entry 3.2 (Ramanujan [9, p. 2, no. 4]). If a and b are real with a2 þ ab þ b2 ¼ 3; then
ðq3 ; q3 Þ2N Y
N
1
¼3 : ð3:2Þ
ðq; qÞN n¼1 1 þ abða þ bÞq3n þ q6n
In (3.2), take a ¼ b ¼ 1 and use (2.14); then one obtains (1.6) in the notation of
(2.10) as
We changed the notation that Ramanujan used in the left-hand side of the next entry
to avoid confusion. Also note that the series on the right side below is fpffiffi3 ðqÞ in the
notation of (2.21).
Entry 3.3 (Ramanujan [9, p. 17, no. 5]). With fa ðqÞ defined by (2.21),
pffiffiffi pffiffiffi
1þ 3 3þ 3
f1 ðqÞ þ f1 ðqÞ
2 6
XN
qn
2
¼ p ffiffi
ffi pffiffiffi
n¼0 ð1 þ 3q þ q2 Þ?ð1 þ 3qn þ q2n Þ
2 ðq4 ; q4 Þ Y N
1
þ pffiffifficðqÞ 6 6 N pffiffiffi : ð3:3Þ
3 ðq ; q ÞN n¼1 1 þ 3qn þ q2n
ARTICLE IN PRESS
H. Yesilyurt / Advances in Mathematics 190 (2005) 278–299 285
¼ pffiffiffi pffiffiffi
2
n¼0 ð1 þ 2q þ q Þ?ð1 þ 2qn þ q2n Þ
1 YN
1
þ pffiffifficðqÞðq2 ; q4 ÞN pffiffiffi : ð3:4Þ
2 n¼1 1 þ 2qn þ q2n
Note that the series on the right side above is fp2ffiffi ðqÞ in the notation of (2.21).
fa ðqÞ ¼ Gðt; qÞ; fa ðqÞ ¼ Gðt; qÞ; fb ðqÞ ¼ Gðit; qÞ ð4:1Þ
and
ði 1Þ ð1 þ iÞ
ð1 itÞð1 tÞGðt; qÞ þ ð1 þ tÞð1 itÞGðt; qÞ
4t 4t
i
ð1 t2 ÞGðit; qÞ
2t
ðq4 ; q4 ÞN ðitqÞN ðit1 qÞN
¼ : ð4:3Þ
ðq; q2 ÞN ðt4 q4 ; q4 ÞN ðt4 q4 ; q4 ÞN
Using definition (2.32) and dividing both sides of (4.4) by ði 1Þð1 t4 Þ=ð4tÞ; we see
that (3.1) is equivalent to the identity
where in the last step we used the Jacobi triple product identity (2.9). We will verify
that (4.5) is valid for jqjojtjojq1 j for any fixed jqjo1: Let
The proof of Entry 3.1 will be complete once we show that Rðt; qÞ Lðt; qÞ 0: This
will be achieved by showing that Rðt; qÞ Lðt; qÞ satisfies a q-difference equation of
the sort stated in Lemma 2.3 and has no poles, thereby, forcing it to vanish
identically.
Note that if we define kðzÞ :¼ f ðcz; c1 z1 qÞ; then by (2.6) we have
f ðitq; it1 Þ
Rðtq; qÞ tq f ðit; it1 qÞ ðitÞ1
¼ ¼ q ¼ iqt3 :
Rðt; qÞ t f ðt4 q4 ; t4 Þ ðt4 Þ1
f ðt4 ; t4 q4 Þ
Let us verify now that Lðt; qÞ also satisfies the same q-difference equation. To that
end,
¼ fV ðtq; qÞ qt3 V ðt; qÞg ifV ðtq; qÞ þ qt3 V ðt; qÞg
where we employed (2.33). Now Lemma 2.3 implies that Rðt; qÞ V ðt; qÞ either has
at least 3 poles in the region jqjojzjp1; or vanishes identically. But Rðt; qÞ V ðt; qÞ
has at most 3 poles, namely at t ¼ 1; 1; and i in that region, and they are all
removable as we shall demonstrate. It suffices to show that t ¼ 1 is a removable
singularity. Thus,
limð1 tÞLðtÞ ¼ limð1 tÞ fV ðt; qÞ iV ðt; qÞ þ ði 1ÞV ðit; qÞg
t-1 t-1
1 i i1
¼ limð1 tÞ Gðt; qÞ Gðt; qÞ þ Gðit; qÞ
t-1 1þt 1t 1 it
¼ i lim Gðt; qÞ ¼ iðq; qÞ1
N; ð4:7Þ
t-1
by (2.23).
Next, by two applications of (2.9) and (2.20),
limð1 tÞRðtÞ
t-1
( )
ðq4 ; q4 Þ2N f ðit; it1 qÞ
¼ lim ð1 tÞ 2ð1 þ iÞt
t-1 ðq; q2 ÞN ðq; qÞN f ðt4 ; t4 q4 Þ
ðq4 ; q4 Þ2N f ðit; it1 qÞ
¼ 2ð1 þ iÞ lim ð1 tÞt
t-1 ðq; q2 ÞN ðq; qÞN ðt4 ; q4 ÞN ðt4 q4 ; q4 ÞN ðq4 ; q4 ÞN
ðq4 ; q4 ÞN f ðit; it1 qÞ
¼ 2ð1 þ iÞ lim ð1 tÞt
t-1 ðq; q2 ÞN ðq; qÞN ð1 t4 Þðt4 q4 ; q4 ÞN ðt4 q4 ; q4 ÞN
ð1 þ iÞðq4 ; q4 ÞN f ði; iqÞ ð1 þ iÞf ði; iqÞ
¼ ¼
2ðq; q2 ÞN ðq; qÞN ðq4 ; q4 ÞN ðq4 ; q4 ÞN 2ðq; q2 ÞN ðq; qÞN ðq4 ; q4 ÞN
ð1 þ iÞði; qÞN ðiq; qÞN ðq; qÞN ð1 þ iÞð1 þ iÞðiq; qÞN ðiq; qÞN
¼ ¼
2ðq; q2 ÞN ðq; qÞN ðq4 ; q4 ÞN 2ðq; q2 ÞN ðq4 ; q4 ÞN
ðq2 ; q2 ÞN i
¼ i 2 4 4
¼
ðq; q ÞN ðq ; q ÞN ðq; q ÞN ðq ; q4 ÞN ðq2 ; q4 ÞN
2 4
i i
¼ ¼ : ð4:8Þ
ðq; q4 ÞN ðq3 ; q4 ÞN ðq4 ; q4 ÞN ðq2 ; q4 ÞN ðq; qÞN
Our proof of Entry 3.2 is similar to our proof of Entry 3.1. Since 3 ¼
a2 þ ab þ b2 ¼ ða bÞ2 þ 3ab ¼ ða þ bÞ2 ab; we must have jabjo4: Assume with-
out lost of generality that jajojbj; and let a ¼ 2 cosðyÞ: Solving a2 þ ab þ b2 ¼ 3 for
pffiffiffi pffiffiffi
b gives b ¼ cosðyÞ8 3 sinðyÞ: We will take b ¼ cosðyÞ þ 3 sinðyÞ ¼ 2 sinðy
p=6Þ; since replacing y by y gives the other value for b:
Let t ¼ eiy and r ¼ e2pi=3 : Using this parametrization we obtain
fa ðqÞ ¼ GðtÞ; fb ðqÞ ¼ Gðr1 tÞ; and faþb ðqÞ ¼ GðrtÞ:
1 t3 rð1 t3 Þ r1 ð1 t3 Þ
aþ1¼ ; bþ1¼ ; and a þ b 1 ¼ :
tð1 tÞ tð1 r1 tÞ tð1 rtÞ
1 t3 rð1 t3 Þ 1 r1 ð1 t3 Þ
¼ GðtÞ þ Gðr tÞ þ GðrtÞ
tð1 tÞ tð1 r1 tÞ tð1 rtÞ
1 t3
¼ ðV ðtÞ þ rV ðr1 tÞ þ r1 V ðrtÞÞ:
t
reduces to
3ðq3 ; q3 Þ2N
:
ðq; qÞN ðt3 q3 ; q3 ÞN ðt3 q3 ; q3 ÞN
3tðq3 ; q3 Þ3N
V ðtÞ þ rV ðr1 tÞ þ r1 V ðrtÞ ¼ : ð5:1Þ
f ðqÞf ðt3 ; t3 q3 Þ
ARTICLE IN PRESS
H. Yesilyurt / Advances in Mathematics 190 (2005) 278–299 289
Let NðtÞ and DðtÞ denote the right and left sides of (5.1), respectively. We will verify that
NðtÞ DðtÞ satisfies the q-difference equation NðtqÞ DðtqÞ ¼ qt3 ðNðtÞ DðtÞÞ
without any poles in jqjojtjp1: Then using Lemma 2.3, we conclude that NðtÞ
DðtÞ 0:
We employ (4.6) with c ¼ 1; and t and q replaced by t3 and q3 ; respectively, to
deduce that
NðtqÞ tq 1
¼ ¼ qt3 :
NðtÞ t ðt3 Þ1
Next,
¼ V ðtqÞ þ rV ðr1 tqÞ þ r1 V ðrtqÞ þ qt3 fV ðtÞ þ rV ðr1 tÞ þ r1 V ðrtÞg
¼ V ðtqÞ þ qt3 V ðtÞ þ rfV ðr1 tqÞ þ qt3 V ðr1 tÞg þ r1 fV ðrtqÞ þ qt3 V ðrtÞg
where we used (2.33). Lemma 2.3 now implies that either NðtÞ DðtÞ vanishes or has
three more poles than zeros in jqjojtjp1: But NðtÞ DðtÞ has at most three poles,
namely at t ¼ 1; r; r1 ; and they are all removable as we demonstrate. It suffices to
show that t ¼ 1 is removable.
By (2.23),
3tðq3 ; q3 Þ3N
lim ð1 tÞNðtÞ ¼ lim ð1 tÞ
t-1 t-1 f ðqÞf ðt3 ; t3 q3 Þ
3tðq3 ; q3 Þ2N 1
¼ lim ð1 tÞ 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
¼ :
t-1 f ðqÞð1 t Þðt q ; q ÞN ðt q ; q ÞN f ðqÞ
ARTICLE IN PRESS
290 H. Yesilyurt / Advances in Mathematics 190 (2005) 278–299
pffiffiffi
Multiplying both sides by 2= 3; we find that
pffiffiffi pffiffiffi
3þ 3 1þ 3
f1 ðqÞ þ f1 ðqÞ
6 2
pffiffiffi
p ffiffi 2 ðq4 ; q4 ÞN Y N
1 3qn þ q2n
¼ f 3 ðqÞ þ pffiffiffi :
3 ðq; q2 ÞN n¼1 1 þ q4n þ q8n
pffiffiffi
2 ðq4 ; q4 ÞN Y
N
1 2 ðq4 ; q4 ÞN YN
1 3qn þ q2n
pffiffifficðqÞ 6 6 pffiffiffi ¼ pffiffiffi :
3 ðq ; q ÞN n¼1 1 þ 3qn þ q2n 3 ðq; q2 ÞN n¼1 1 þ q4n þ q8n
ð6:1Þ
pffiffiffi n pffiffiffi
ðq6 ; q6 ÞN Y
N
ð1 3q þ q2n Þð1 þ 3qn þ q2n Þ
ðq; q2 ÞN n¼1 1 þ q4n þ q8n
ðq6 ; q6 ÞN Y
N
1 q2n þ q4n
¼
ðq; q ÞN n¼1 1 þ q4n þ q8n
2
ðq6 ; q6 ÞN Y
N
1
¼
ðq; q ÞN n¼1 1 þ q2n þ q4n
2
where in the last step (2.13) is used. Equality (6.1) now follows, and so the proof of
Entry 3.3 is complete.
2 pffiffifficðqÞf ðqÞðq2 ; q4 Þ
Gði; iqÞ þ a1 Gði; iqÞ Gða; qÞ ¼ 2 N
:
1þa f ða; a1 qÞ
ð7:1Þ
pffiffifficðiqÞf ðiqÞðq2 ; q4 Þ
Gði; qÞ þ a1 Gði; qÞ 2V ða; iqÞ ¼ 2 N
: ð7:2Þ
f ða; aqÞ
The following identities will be needed for the remainder of the proof:
f ða; a1 qÞf ða; a1 qÞ ¼ ðaÞN ða1 qÞN f ðqÞðaÞN ða1 qÞN f ðqÞ
¼ ð1 iÞðq4 ; q4 ÞN f 2 ðqÞ:
Equalities (7.9) and (7.10) readily imply (7.5) and (7.6). And finally we obtain (7.7)
and (7.8) by replacing q by iq in (7.5) and (7.6), respectively.
We now return to (7.2) and use (7.4), (7.8), and (2.13) with q replaced by iq to
deduce that
pffiffifficðiqÞf ðiqÞðq2 ; q4 Þ
N
¼ 2
f ða; aqÞ
pffiffifficðiqÞf ðiqÞðq2 ; q4 Þ f ða; aqÞ
N
¼ 2
f ða; aqÞf ða; aqÞ
pffiffifficðiqÞf ðiqÞðq2 ; q4 Þ ðcðqÞ acðqÞÞ
N
¼ 2
ð1 iÞðq4 ; q4 ÞN f 2 ðiqÞ
cðiqÞðq2 ; q4 ÞN ðcðqÞ acðqÞÞ
¼a
ðq4 ; q4 ÞN f ðiqÞ
ðq2 ; q4 ÞN ðcðqÞ acðqÞÞ
¼a
ðq4 ; q4 ÞN ðq2 ; q4 ÞN
ðq2 ; q4 ÞN ðcðqÞ acðqÞÞ
¼a
ðq2 ; q2 ÞN
¼ aðq2 ; q4 Þ2N ðcðqÞ acðqÞÞ: ð7:11Þ
Let
The identity,
together with Entry 3.1 will be used to verify (7.11). We will not prove (7.13), because
its proof is very similar to that of (5.1). The q-difference equation satisfied by Kðt; qÞ
is Kðtq; qÞ ¼ aqt3 Kðt; qÞ: It then suffices, by Lemma 2.3, to verify that the residues
at four of the six singularities match those of the two representations (7.12) and
(7.13) of Kðt; qÞ: It is easily verified that t ¼ a is a zero for the two representations
(7.12) and (7.13) of Kðt; qÞ: Therefore, one only needs to check the residues at any
three of the six singularities. If we knew the two other zeros whose existence is
guaranteed by Lemma 2.3, we then would be able to reduce the right-hand side of
(7.13) to a single product, but we are unable to determine these two zeros.
Let us define, by using (4.5),
1 1 1
¼ ðEða; iqÞ þ Eða; iqÞÞ þ iKða; qÞ þ aKða; qÞ: ð7:16Þ
að1 iÞ 2 2
Equalities (7.13) and (7.15) will then be used to verify that (7.16) reduces to the right-
hand side of (7.11), which will complete the proof of Entry 3.4.
Using (7.14), we have
Eðt; qÞ þ Eðt; qÞ ¼ ð1 iÞfV ðt; qÞ þ V ðt; qÞ V ðit; qÞ V ðit; qÞg:
ARTICLE IN PRESS
294 H. Yesilyurt / Advances in Mathematics 190 (2005) 278–299
Eða; qÞ þ Eða; qÞ
1
ðEða; iqÞ þ Eða; iqÞÞ
að1 iÞ
¼ a1 V ða; iqÞ þ a1 V ða; iqÞ V ða; iqÞ þ V ða; iqÞ: ð7:17Þ
By (7.12),
1 1 1
ðEða; iqÞ þ Eða; iqÞÞ þ iKða; qÞ þ aKða; qÞ
að1 iÞ 2 2
¼ a1 V ða; iqÞ þ a1 V ða; iqÞ V ða; iqÞ þ V ða; iqÞ
Using (7.13), (2.3), (2.6), and (2.19) with q replaced by q4 ; we find that
f 3 ðq4 Þf ð1; qÞ
Kða; qÞ ¼ 4
f ðiqÞf ða; a1 qÞf ð1; q4 Þ
cðq2 Þf 2 ðqÞf ð1; qÞ
2að1 þ iÞ
f ða; a1 qÞf ðia; ia1 qÞf ð1; q2 Þ
f 3 ðq4 ÞcðqÞ cðq2 Þf 2 ðqÞcðqÞ
¼ 4 1
2að1 þ iÞ
4
f ðiqÞf ða; a qÞcðq Þ f ða; a1 qÞf ða1 ; aqÞcðq2 Þ
f 3 ðq4 ÞcðqÞ cðq2 Þf 2 ðqÞcðqÞ
¼ 4 1
þ 2ð1 iÞ 2
4
f ðiqÞf ða; a qÞcðq Þ f ða; a1 qÞcðq2 Þ
j2 ðq4 ÞcðqÞ cðq2 Þf 2 ðqÞcðqÞf ða; a1 qÞ
¼ 4 þ 2ð1 iÞ :
f ðiqÞf ða; a1 qÞ f 2 ða; a1 qÞcðq2 Þf ða; a1 qÞ
j2 ðq4 ÞcðqÞ
Kða; qÞ ¼ 4
f ðiqÞf ða; a1 qÞ
cðq2 Þf 2 ðqÞcðqÞðcðiqÞ acðiqÞÞ
þ 2ð1 iÞ
f ða; a1 qÞcðq2 Þð1 iÞðq4 ; q4 ÞN f 2 ðqÞ
j2 ðq4 ÞcðqÞ cðq2 ÞcðqÞcðiqÞ
¼ 4 þ 2
f ðiqÞf ða; a1 qÞ f ða; a1 qÞcðq2 Þðq4 ; q4 ÞN
cðq2 ÞcðqÞcðiqÞ
2a
f ða; a1 qÞcðq2 Þðq4 ; q4 ÞN
j2 ðq4 ÞcðqÞ cðq2 ÞcðqÞf 2 ðq2 Þ
¼ 4 1
þ2
f ðiqÞf ða; a qÞ f ðiqÞf ða; a1 qÞcðq2 Þðq4 ; q4 ÞN
cðq2 ÞcðqÞf 2 ðq2 Þ
2a ; ð7:19Þ
f ðiqÞf ða; a1 qÞcðq2 Þðq4 ; q4 ÞN
where we used (2.17) in the form f ðqÞcðqÞ ¼ f 2 ðq2 Þ with q replaced by iq and iq;
respectively. But by (2.16),
where we used Euler’s identity (2.20), and (2.14). Using (7.20) in (7.19), (2.17) in the
form f ðqÞcðqÞ ¼ f 2 ðq2 Þ with q replaced by iq and iq; respectively, (7.5), and
ARTICLE IN PRESS
296 H. Yesilyurt / Advances in Mathematics 190 (2005) 278–299
Similarly, we obtain
1
fEða; qÞ þ Eða; qÞg
að1 iÞ
1þi
¼ ðq2 ; q4 Þ2N ð f ða; a1 qÞ þ f ða; a1 qÞÞ ¼ 2aðq2 ; q4 Þ2N cðiqÞ;
að1 iÞ
ð7:27Þ
1
fEða; iqÞ þ Eða; iqÞg ¼ 2aðq2 ; q4 Þ2N cðqÞ: ð7:28Þ
að1 iÞ
Adding (7.22) and (7.28) together, we find that (7.16) reduces to the right-hand side
of (7.11), i.e.,
1 1 1
iKða; qÞ þ aKða; qÞ þ fEða; iqÞ þ Eða; iqÞg
2 2 að1 iÞ
¼ iðq2 ; q4 Þ2N cðqÞ aðq2 ; q4 Þ2N cðqÞ þ 2aðq2 ; q4 Þ2N cðqÞ
This completes the verification of (7.11), since we have already verified (7.16). Hence,
the proof of Entry 3.4 is complete.
8. Proof of 1.8
Let us recall Eqs. (2.35) and (5.1), which is the equivalent form of Entry 3.2. Thus,
3tðq3 ; q3 Þ3N
V ðtÞ þ rV ðr1 tÞ þ r1 V ðrtÞ ¼ ; ð8:1Þ
ðqÞN f ðt3 ; t3 q3 Þ
t X N
q3nðnþ1Þ=2
V ðtÞ ¼ 1 þ ð1Þn ; ð8:2Þ
ðqÞN n¼N 1 tqn
ARTICLE IN PRESS
298 H. Yesilyurt / Advances in Mathematics 190 (2005) 278–299
3tðq3 ; q3 Þ3N
ðqÞN f ðt3 ; t3 q3 Þ
t X N
q3nðnþ1Þ=2
¼1þ ð1Þn
ðqÞN n¼N 1 tqn
rt X N
q3nðnþ1Þ=2
þrþ ð1Þn
ðqÞN n¼N 1 r1 tqn
r1 t XN
q3nðnþ1Þ=2
þ r1 þ ð1Þn
ðqÞN n¼N 1 rtqn
t X N
n 3nðnþ1Þ=2 1 r r1
¼ ð1Þ q þ þ
ðqÞN n¼N 1 tqn 1 r1 tqn 1 rtqn
3t X N
q3nðnþ1Þ=2
¼ ð1Þn :
ðqÞN n¼N 1 t3 q3n
Then, we have
ðq3 ; q3 Þ3N X
N
q3nðnþ1Þ=2
3 3 3
¼ ð1Þn : ð8:3Þ
f ðt ; t q Þ n¼N 1 t3 q3n
Now, (1.8) follows if one replaces q3 by q and t3 by t; respectively, and employs (2.9)
in (8.3).
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank my adviser Professor Bruce C. Berndt for his guidance and
assistance at all stages of this work.
References
[1] G.E. Andrews, On basic hypergeometric series, mock theta functions, and partitions. I, Quart.
J. Math. Oxford Ser. 17 (2) (1966) 64–80.
[2] G.E. Andrews, Mock theta functions, Theta functions—Bowdoin 1987, Part 2, Proceedings of
Symposia in Pure Mathematics Vol. 49, Brunswick, ME, 1987, pp. 283–298.
[3] A.O.L. Atkin, P. Swinnerton-Dyer, Some properties of partitions, Proc. London. Math. Soc. 4 (4)
(1954) 84–106.
[4] B.C. Berndt, Ramanujan’s Notebooks, Part III, Springer, New York, 1991.
[5] F.J. Dyson, Some guesses in the theory of partitions, Vol. 8, Eureka, Cambridge, 1944,
pp. 10–15.
[6] R.J. Evans, Generalized Lambert series, in: B.C. Berndt, H.G. Diamond, A.J. Hildebrand (Eds.),
Analytic Number Theory Allerton Park, IL, 1995), Vol. 1, Birkhäuser, Boston, 1996, pp. 357–370.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
H. Yesilyurt / Advances in Mathematics 190 (2005) 278–299 299
[7] N.J. Fine, Basic Hypergeometric Series and Applications, Mathematical Surveys and Monographs,
Vol. 27, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1988.
[8] F.G. Garvan, New combinatorial interpretations of Ramanujan’s partition congruences mod 5,7 and
11, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 305 (1988) 47–77.
[9] S. Ramanujan, The Lost Notebook and Other Unpublished Papers, Narosa, New Delhi, 1988.
[10] G.N. Watson, The final problem: an account of the mock theta functions, J. London Math. Soc.
11 (1936) 55–80.