Navigating Research on Riemann Hypothesis

Newtime
Messages
347
Reaction score
0
Let me start off by saying I have not yet had a formal course in Number Thoery and have only read briefly on the subject...hence the question:

How close (in terms that would be understood by someone in my position) is the math community to proving the Riemann Hypothesis? I'm assuming there are journal articles published on recent research but like I said these would be over my head and I wouldn't know the significance (or lack thereof) of what I was reading.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Look it up on Wikipedia. The article contains a thorough description of the subject as well as descriptions of various works attempting to solve it.
 
Newtime said:
How close (in terms that would be understood by someone in my position) is the math community to proving the Riemann Hypothesis?

Extremely far. Several major results haver been proved, restricting the positions zeros can fall -- but not very far. As far as I know, the zeros violating the RH could be as common as the primes (but, like the primes, they are known to be of asymptotic density 0).
 
Newtime said:
Let me start off by saying I have not yet had a formal course in Number Thoery and have only read briefly on the subject...hence the question:

How close (in terms that would be understood by someone in my position) is the math community to proving the Riemann Hypothesis? I'm assuming there are journal articles published on recent research but like I said these would be over my head and I wouldn't know the significance (or lack thereof) of what I was reading.

J. Brian Conrey wrote an excellent article a few years back on the Riemann Hypothesis (The Riemann Hypothesis, Notices of the AMS, March 2003) which provides an overview in relative layman's terms.
 
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...
##\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...
Back
Top