اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدExperiments with zeta zeros and Perrons formula
156
0
0.0
(
0
)
تأليف
Robert Baillie
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
Of what use are the zeros of the Riemann zeta function? We can use sums involving zeta zeros to count the primes up to $x$. Perrons formula leads to sums over zeta zeros that can count the squarefree integers up to $x$, or tally Eulers $phi$ function and other arithmetical functions. This is largely a presentation of experimental results.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
We prove an analogue of Kroneckers second limit formula for a continuous family of indefinite zeta functions. Indefinite zeta functions were introduced in the authors previous paper as Mellin transforms of indefinite theta functions, as defined by Zw
egers. Our formula is valid in dimension g=2 at s=1 or s=0. For a choice of parameters obeying a certain symmetry, an indefinite zeta function is a differenced ray class zeta function of a real quadratic field, and its special value at $s=0$ was conjectured by Stark to be a logarithm of an algebraic unit. Our formula also permits practical high-precision computation of Stark ray class invariants.
In this paper we give the q-extension of Euler numbers which can be viewed as interpolating of the q-analogue of Euler zeta function ay negative integers, in the same way that Riemann zeta function interpolates Bernoulli numbers at negative integers.
Finally we woll treat some identities of the q-extension of the euler numbers by using fermionic p-adic q-integration on Z_p.
In 2008 I thought I found a proof of the Riemann Hypothesis, but there was an error. In the Spring 2020 I believed to have fixed the error, but it cannot be fixed. I describe here where the error was. It took me several days to find the error in a ca
reful checking before a possible submission to a payable review offered by one leading journal. There were three simple lemmas and one simple theorem, all were correct, yet there was an error: what Lemma 2 proved was not exactly what Lemma 3 needed. So, it was the connection of the lemmas. This paper came out empty, but I have found a different proof of the Riemann Hypothesis and it seems so far correct. In the discussion at the end of this paper I raise a matter that I think is of importance to the review process in mathematics.
The Hardy hypothesis, as an analogue to the Riemann hypothesis for the Riemann zeta function, is a conjecture proposed by Hardy in 1940, that all of the nontrivial zeros for the Ramanujan zeta function have a real part equal to 6. In this paper, we p
ropose the power series expansion for the entire Ramanujan zeta function using the work of Mordell. Then, we suggest an alternative infinite product for the entire Ramanujan zeta function derived from the work of Conrey and Ghosh. We also establish the class of the entire Ramanujan zeta function related to the functional equation coming from Wilton. Motivated by the work of Lekkerkerker, we prove an conjecture due to Bruijn that all of the zeros of the Ramanujan Xi function are nonzero real numbers. From theory of the entire functions, we also prove that the Hardy hypothesis is true.
The Collatz Conjecture (also known as the 3x+1 Problem) proposes that the following algorithm will, after a certain number of iterations, always yield the number 1: given a natural number, multiply by three and add one if the number is odd, halve the
resulting number, then repeat. In this article, for each $N$ for which the Collatz Conjecture holds we define the $N^{th}$ Collatz polynomial to be the monic polynomial with constant term $N$ and $k^{th}$ term (for $k > 1$) the $k^{th}$ iterate of $N$ under the Collatz function. In particular, we bound the moduli of the roots of these polynomials, prove theorems on when they have rational integer roots, and suggest further applications and avenues of research.
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
