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

This is my third question on this site regarding Montgomery's conjecture -- and I apologize if this is too much -- but I am still not understanding well why this conjecture is believed to be true.

The conjecture I am talking about is as follows (I am giving the slightly corrected version of Freidlander-Granville). et $q>1$ be an integer, $a$ an integer coprime to $q$, $\psi(q,a,x) = \sum_{p^\alpha < x, p^\alpha \equiv a \pmod{q}} \Lambda(n)$. Then:

Conjecture for $x>q$, one has $\psi(x,q) = \frac{x}{\phi(q)} + O(x^{1/2+\epsilon} q^{-1/2})$, with an implied constant depending only on $\epsilon$.

In his answer to my preceding question, Matt Young gives the following heuristic: For $\chi$ a non-principal Dirichlet character of $(\mathbb Z/q\mathbb Z)^\ast$, one has under GRH $\psi(\chi,x) = O(x^{1/2+\epsilon})$. Now $\psi(q,a,x)$ is the arithmetic average of the (approximately $q$) terms $\chi^{-1}(a) \psi(\chi,x)$, and if those (weighted) terms are in random position one should expect their sum to have a norm roughly $q^{1/2}$ the norm of the individual term (by Einstein's Brownian motion theorem if you like), giving the conjecture.

This heuristic helped me a lot then but now I'd like to go further.

Is there a good reason to believe that the $\chi^{-1}(a) \psi(\chi,x)$ are kind of randomly distributed, for every $a$ relatively prime to $q$? Could this expectation have some link, through the explicit formulas, with the conjectures on the position of zeros on the critical line of Dirichlet L-functions (assuming GRH)?

share|improve this question
    
I think Katz has something in his book on Kloostermann sums, that they are equidistributed in some suitable sense (look at all Kloos to given a modulus, similar to looking at all characters). This is then a function field analogue perhaps. Maybe this is a bit of stretch though. –  v08ltu Jun 5 '13 at 18:53
    
Is this "equidistribution in some suitable sense" of Kloosterman sums related to Chebotarev's theorem? –  Sylvain JULIEN Jun 8 '13 at 21:20

1 Answer 1

up vote 4 down vote accepted

This is not exactly what you asked, but I believe that there is a simpler heuristic for Montgomery's conjecture which does not involve characters.

Let $A$ be the arithmetic progression $a\pmod q$, where $a$ and $q$ are coprime to each other. We consider a sequence of Bernoulli random variables $\(X_n\)_{n\in A}$ such that

$$\textbf{Prob}(X_n=1)=\frac{q}{\phi(q)\log n} \quad\text{and}\quad \textbf{Prob}(X_n=0)=1-\frac{q}{\phi(q)\log n}.$$

The event $X_n=1$ models the event that $n$ is prime. (There are about $\le x/q$ elements in $A$ up to $x$ and about $x/(\phi(q)\log x)$ of them are primes.) Let $\Psi(x)=\sum_{n\le x} X_n\log n$. This is a random model for $\psi(x)$ (or rather $\theta(x)=\sum_{p\le x}\log p$, but this is merely a technicality). Note that

$$ \mathbb{E}[\Psi(x)] = \frac{q}{\phi(q)}\sum_{n\le x,\,n\equiv a\pmod q}1 = \frac{q}{\phi(q)}(x/q+O(1))=\frac{x}{\phi(q)} + O(q/\phi(q)) $$ and $$ \text{Var}[\Psi(x)] = \frac{q}{\phi(q)} \sum_{n\le x,\, n\equiv a\pmod q}\log n \sim \frac{x\log x}{\phi(q)}. $$ The Central Limit Theorem implies that the random variable $(\Psi(x) - x/\phi(q))/\sqrt{x\log x/\phi(q)}$ tends to the standard normal distribution. In particular, almost surely as $x\to\infty$, we have that $$ \left|\Psi(x) - \frac{x}{\phi(q)} \right| \ll x^\epsilon \sqrt{\frac{x\log x}{\phi(q)}}. $$ (In fact, one should expect this to become accurate as soon as $x/q$ becomes a bit large, that is to say there are enough summands in $\Psi(x)$.) So we deduced Montgomery's conjecture for $\Psi(x)$, the random model of $\psi(x)$.

share|improve this answer
    
Edited to correct a mistake in the probability that $X_n=1$ and $X_n=0$. –  Dimitris Koukoulopoulos Jun 10 '13 at 13:30
    
Dear Dimitris, thanks for your answer. Even if it is not exactly what I asked, this is more or less what I needed. Actually, I recently noticed that some non-abelian generalizations of Montgomery's conjecture (suggered by Murty and Murty) are false (I didn't want then to be false, I swear-- I wanted to apply them: but they gave me too strong results to be true). Now I am trying to understand what goes wrong, in order to get a conjecture that might be correct. I will try to work out what this heuristics give in the non-abelian case, and see what comes out. –  Joël Jun 11 '13 at 1:01

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.