0
$\begingroup$

There are some qualitative theorems of Bohr, Jessen and Titchmarsh (e.g. The Theory of the Riemann zeta function, E.C. Titchmarsh, pages 306-308) proving that there is a $K=K(a,\alpha,\beta)$ such that the number of solutions to $\zeta(s)=a$, $a\neq 0$, in the rectangle $1/2<\alpha<\beta<1$, $0<t<T$, is greater than $KT$. However, there doesn't seem to be an obvious way of using the method described in Titchmarsh to determine the size of $K$ as a function of the variable $a$.

I am interested in a similar quantitative question:

At what height $T(\alpha,\delta)$ are you guaranteed there exists an $s$ such that $|\zeta(s)|=\delta$ in the region $\sigma>1-\alpha$, $0<t<T$?

Obviously, if there is a zero in the region then you're done. For sufficiently small $\delta$ it follows from Euler's product formula that such points cannot be significantly beyond the line $\sigma=1$.

Assuming that $$\frac{1}{|\rho_a\zeta'(\rho_a)|}\leq C$$ at the points $\rho_a$ where $\zeta(\rho_a)=a$ and $0<\alpha<7/4$, I find that

$$\log T(\alpha,\delta)= o \left(\delta^{-7/\alpha}\right),$$ but I think this bound is bad.

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

It suffices to construct points in the rectangle with $|\zeta(s)|\leq\delta$. This can be done, even to the right of 1, by diophantine approximation: Pick some $t$, such that for the first $k$ primes $p_1, \ldots, p_k$ we have $t\log p_i\bmod 2\pi\in[\frac{4\pi}{5}, \frac{6p}{5}]$. Then $\prod_{i=1}^k\left(1-\frac{1}{p^{1+it}}\right)^{-1}$ is small. Pick a small $\sigma>1$, depending on $k$, such that $\prod_{i=k+1}^\infty\left(1-\frac{1}{p^{s}}\right)^{-1}$ is bounded by e.g. 2 in the half plane $\Re\;s>\sigma$. If $k$ is large, then $\sigma$ will be close to 1, so $\prod_{i=1}^k\left(1-\frac{1}{p^{\sigma+it}}\right)^{-1}$ is still small.

This procedure can be made completely explicit, however, when using the pigeon hole principle for constructing $t$, you get an exponential dependency on $k$, and since $\prod_{i=1}^k\left(1+\frac{1}{p}\right)^{-1}\asymp\frac{1}{\log k}$, the final result is double exponential.

If we want to stay to the right of 1, we cannot do much better, since under RH we have $\frac{1}{\zeta(1+it)}\ll\log\log t$. If we do not want to stay there, things become more complicated, since the product expansion is no longer valid.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ I suspect it is possible to use a similar technique inside the strip by employing some coefficients. I will look into it. Yes the double exponential seems rather poor, and I think you'd get much smaller estimates inside the strip. Thank you. $\endgroup$ Oct 1, 2014 at 6:40

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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