Accurate Proof and varification for Riemann Hypothesis

imag94
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Accurate Proof verification of Riemann’s Hypothesis

Riemann Hypothesis states that \int \frac{1}{ln (x)} has a root at \frac{1}{2} when s=2

The time series expansion of Log function is,

\ln(x) = \frac {[x-1}{[x-2}+ \frac{1){3} \frac{x-3}{x-4} + \frac{1}{5}\frac{x-5}{x-6}+……. [\tex]<br /> Let it be equal to mx + c [\tex] because of the Linear nature of Log function.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; Now,&lt;br /&gt; \int \frac{1}{ln(x)}=\int\frac{1}{mx+c}[\tex]&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt; If we take x=2 from Log function we can deduce m=0.35 and c= 0.0007&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt; Riemann stipulates that for any value x \int \frac{1}{ln (x) will have to be taken between limits 2 and x&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt; So,&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt; \int^2 _1/2 \frac{1}{ln(x)} [\tex] is done using Cauchys principal number taken between 2 to 1 and from 1 to ½&amp;amp;lt;br /&amp;amp;gt; Which is, &amp;amp;lt;br /&amp;amp;gt; {\ln(035x1+0.0007)-\\ln(0.5x0.35+0.0007)} + {\ln(0.35x2 +0.0007)-\ln(0.35x1+0.0007)}[\tex]&amp;amp;amp;lt;br /&amp;amp;amp;gt; Taking the proper order of integrations and signs we get&amp;amp;amp;lt;br /&amp;amp;amp;gt; [-1.04782 + 0.35568]+[-1.04782+1.73897]=-0.69+0.69 =0[\tex]&amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;br /&amp;amp;amp;amp;gt; &amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;br /&amp;amp;amp;amp;gt; Which proves that the root of Riemann’s ξ function is 1/2 when s=2&amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;br /&amp;amp;amp;amp;gt; &amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;br /&amp;amp;amp;amp;gt; &amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;br /&amp;amp;amp;amp;gt; Mathew Cherian
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Mathew, some words of advice:

1. Learn to use the [ tex ] feature properly. It is tex with a lowercase t, not Tex.

2. Learn to use the Preview button.

3. Learn what the Riemann zeta function is. Your integral is the logarithmic integral, not the Riemann zeta function.

4. Learn what the Riemann says. It says the all non-trivial (complex) zeros of the Riemann zeta hypothesis have real part = 1/2.

5. Learn how to do math.

6. Learn that this site has rules against posts of this sort.
 
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
When decomposing a representation ##\rho## of a finite group ##G## into irreducible representations, we can find the number of times the representation contains a particular irrep ##\rho_0## through the character inner product $$ \langle \chi, \chi_0\rangle = \frac{1}{|G|} \sum_{g\in G} \chi(g) \chi_0(g)^*$$ where ##\chi## and ##\chi_0## are the characters of ##\rho## and ##\rho_0##, respectively. Since all group elements in the same conjugacy class have the same characters, this may be...
Back
Top