Is there a course available for the Riemann Hypothesis (RH)?

  • Thread starter Thread starter MathematicalPhysicist
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Course Introductory
MathematicalPhysicist
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
4,662
Reaction score
372
Does someone know if there's a course offered on RH?

I mean reading the literature can be quite intimidating without some beckground before, I read somewhere that the prof from purdue (who allegedlly proved RH) was contemplating offering such a course, but didn't offer such a course.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If you mean to say Riemann Hypothesis by 'RH' ,here's a good book:
Prime Obsession (by J. Derbyshire).
 
a phycisist approach to RH , is a bit simpler it use the approximate asymptotic formula

f^{-1} (x) = \sqrt (4\pi ) \frac{d^{-1/2}g(x)}{dx^{-1/2}}

this formula is valid only for one spatial dimension (x,t) , so the conjectured WKB approximation for the inverse of the potential inside the Hamiltonian

-D^{2}+f(x) with D meaning derivative respect to 'x' is

\pi f^{-1}(x) = \int_{0}^{x} \frac{g(t)dt}{(x-t)^{1/2}}

with g(s)= (-i)^{1/2}\frac{ \xi ' (1/2+is)}{\xi(1/2+is)}+(i)^{1/2}\frac{ \xi ' (1/2-is)}{\xi(1/2-is)}

since for RH g(s)= dN(s) and N(E)= \frac{1}{\pi}Arg \xi(1/2+iE)
 
MathematicalPhysicist said:
Does someone know if there's a course offered on RH?

I mean reading the literature can be quite intimidating without some beckground before, I read somewhere that the prof from purdue (who allegedlly proved RH) was contemplating offering such a course, but didn't offer such a course.

I think I would be interested in working on such a project although I think it would be better titled as the zeta function and approached through a strong foundation in Complex Analysis. I'm not an expert though.
 
Eynstone said:
If you mean to say Riemann Hypothesis by 'RH' ,here's a good book:
Prime Obsession (by J. Derbyshire).

I'll second this, just finishing it up actually.
 
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
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