Take the 2-minute tour ×
MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

There is an elementary statement that I believe I have read somewhere, but I can't remember where. I'd like to know if the statement is correct (in which case it is surely standard) and if so, where I can find a proof of it.

The statement is about the prime-counting function $\psi(x) = \sum_{ p^n < x } \log p$. It is well-known that GRH is equivalent to $\psi(x) = x + O(x^{1/2} \log^2 x)$. The statement in question is:

If $1/2< \alpha < 1$ is a real number, and $\zeta(s)$ has no zero on $\Re s> \alpha$, then $\psi(x) = x + O(x^{\alpha} \log x)$?

The point here is that we get to replace $\log^2 x$ by $\log x$. Thanks for any reference (or disproof, if this is just a dream I made).

share|improve this question

1 Answer 1

up vote 5 down vote accepted

The reference for this (given in the 3rd edition of Davenport's Multiplicative Number Theory) is:

Grosswald, Émile. "Sur l'ordre de grandeur des différences $\psi(x)-x$ et $\pi(x)-\ell i(x)$." (French) C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris 260 (1965), 3813–3816.

It seems (according to the Math Review) that for $\alpha$ fixed, the error is $O(x^\alpha)$. So, two powers of the logarithm can be saved.

share|improve this answer
    
Great, thank you! –  Joël May 23 '13 at 16:15
6  
Intuitively, the reason for the saving comes from the fact that it is known (from zero density estimates) that only a tiny fraction of the zeroes of zeta can have real part anywhere close to $\alpha$, so their net contribution to the explicit formula $\psi(x) = x - \sum_\rho \frac{x^\rho}{\rho} + \ldots$ is small enough that their portion of sum $\sum_\rho 1/\rho$ is absolutely convergent, thus producing no logarithmic factor. –  Terry Tao May 23 '13 at 16:37

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.