- #1

- 16

- 0

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

- Thread starter TheOogy
- Start date

- #1

- 16

- 0

- #2

- 18

- 0

- #3

- 264

- 1

That have a different real part? I would think so. For instance, take s=1/4 and s=3/4 and plug them into the functional equation.

[tex] \zeta(s) = 2^s\pi^{s-1}\sin\left(\frac{\pi s}{2}\right)\Gamma(1-s)\zeta(1-s) \! [/tex]

- #4

- 16

- 0

- #5

- 18

- 0

i m wondering too why 1/4 and 3/4 ,i m wondering about p/2^n while p<2^n so that we stay in [0 1] with p prime.

i just have noticed the 3/4 , 5/4 when i considered if zeta(z) is close to o then instead of considering zeta(z) i plug in zeta(z) i mean zeta{(zeta(z)} and do some crafting just like heaviside has done on distribution ,some approximation and see the expression not for z but for the complex zeta(z) ...there might be something arround go on try if you have time .

i just have noticed the 3/4 , 5/4 when i considered if zeta(z) is close to o then instead of considering zeta(z) i plug in zeta(z) i mean zeta{(zeta(z)} and do some crafting just like heaviside has done on distribution ,some approximation and see the expression not for z but for the complex zeta(z) ...there might be something arround go on try if you have time .

Last edited:

- #6

- 264

- 1

I was implying that there probably exists a real number t (due to what I mentioned in my first post) which satisfies:

[tex]\Im[\zeta(1/4 + it)] = \Im [\zeta(3/4 + it)]= 0[/tex]

etc. for other values of re(s)

- #7

- 18

- 0

- #8

- 16

- 0

- #9

- 18

- 0

- #10

- 16

- 0

conjugates don't have the same imaginary part.

- #11

- 18

- 0

So try to find out about your idea ,have you some was ?

- #12

- 14

- 0

fortunately all the complex zeros outside of the known strip are negative and even integers, so of course all of them are (complex but real) zeros of the RZF and have the same imaginary part (equal to zero). But the RZF has no zeros with nonzero imaginary part outside of the strip $0<\re z<1$. By the way those zeros are called trivial zeros.

- #13

- 18

- 0

- #14

CRGreathouse

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 2,824

- 0

The RH is that there are no nontrivial zeros off the critical *line*. It has been proven that there are no nontrivial zeros off the critical *strip*.

- #15

- 14

- 0

Hi!,

there is NOT an official proof but many people is trying hard.

there is NOT an official proof but many people is trying hard.

Last edited:

- #16

- 18

- 0

But who just said it s been proven there are no nontrivial zero off the critical line?do you have the proof reference?i would like to have a look because i have not heard yet about it.problems like this are good not for the results of the proof but they develop logic and minds ,they develop the way of walking close to the reality.

- #17

CRGreathouse

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 2,824

- 0

But who just said it s been proven there are no nontrivial zero off the critical line?do you have the proof reference?i would like to have a look because i have not heard yet about it.problems like this are good not for the results of the proof but they develop logic and minds ,they develop the way of walking close to the reality.

No one on this thread has said that there are no nontrivial zeros off the critical line. *I* said that there are no nontrivial zeros off the critical strip -- this is well-known.

- #18

- 18

- 0

so .who knows if zeta can be real off the critical line but on the critical strip?then he s got a proof as well it looks .tell me something quickly where do you know zeta real ,for a variable complex on the critical strip with imaginary part different of zero.

- #19

CRGreathouse

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 2,824

- 0

so .who knows if zeta can be real off the critical line but on the critical strip?

Are you asking if anyone's solved the Riemann hypothesis?

- #20

- 18

- 0

i believe that people have sorted RH since years now ,just not published , i know some mathematicians will not stuck with RH .

I NEED HISTORY ABOUT RIEMANN AND RH .EVERYTHING HE HAS SAID ABOUT IT .

BELIEVE THAT HE CAN BE WRONG HE IS A HUMAN BEING LIKE EULOR OR GAUSS WHO COULD NOT SORTED :1-1+1-1+1...............=

I M LIL BIT TROUBBLED ,DON T MIND MUCH.

CHEERS

- #21

- 18

- 0

Riemann hypothesis SKELETON OF PROOF in www.guideforex.webs.com[/URL]

Last edited by a moderator:

- #22

HallsofIvy

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 41,847

- 966

Are you trying to SAY something here?

i believe that people have sorted RH since years now ,just not published , i know some mathematicians will not stuck with RH .

I NEED HISTORY ABOUT RIEMANN AND RH .EVERYTHING HE HAS SAID ABOUT IT .

BELIEVE THAT HE CAN BE WRONG HE IS A HUMAN BEING LIKE EULOR OR GAUSS WHO COULD NOT SORTED :1-1+1-1+1...............=

I M LIL BIT TROUBBLED ,DON T MIND MUCH.

CHEERS

Riemann hypothesis SKELETON OF PROOF in www.guideforex.webs.com[/URL][/QUOTE]

There is no such at that site.

Last edited by a moderator:

- #23

- 18

- 0

in mathematics ressources of www.guideforex.webs.com[/URL] , and learn at the same time forex to profit from your math skills .

Last edited by a moderator:

- #24

- 107

- 0

All I can say is, What?!

- #25

- 107

- 1

Share:

- Replies
- 19

- Views
- 10K