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

In an answer to a question on MU about the Riemann zeta function, I sketched a proof that the probability distribution on $\mathbb{N}$ which assigns $n$ the probability

$$\frac{ \frac{1}{n^s} }{\zeta(s)}$$

(henceforth called the zeta distribution with parameter $s$) where $s > 1$ is the unique family of probability distributions on $\mathbb{N}$ satisfying the following three requirements:

  • The exponent of $p$ and the exponent of $q$ in the prime factorization of $n$ are chosen independently for all pairs of primes $p \neq q$.
  • The exponent of a particular prime $p$ is geometrically distributed.
  • The probabilities are monotonically decreasing as a function of $n$.

The basic motivation for the first requirement is the Chinese Remainder Theorem. I can think of two motivations for the second requirement: first, that geometric distributions are the maximally entropic distributions on $\mathbb{N}_{\ge 0}$ with a given mean, and second, that (if I'm not mistaken) one naturally gets a geometric distribution from Haar measure on the $p$-adic integers.

In fact, the distribution one gets from Haar measure on the $p$-adic integers is the one in which a $p$-adic integer is divisible by exactly $p^k$ with probability $(1 - p^{-1}) p^{-k}$. This is essentially the $s \to 1$ limit of the zeta distribution above, which I gave as a reason one might deduce that this limit is important from first principles.

It seems like it should be possible to combine the motivations for the first two requirements into a statement about Haar measure on the profinite integers $\prod_p \mathbb{Z}_p$, except that I don't know exactly what kind of statement I'd be looking for, so I thought I'd ask here.

Question: Complete the following statement. It is natural to study the $s \to 1$ limit of the zeta distribution because (some statement about Haar measure on the profinite integers, maybe with "Tate's thesis" thrown in somewhere).

share|improve this question
3  
This is also the unique nontrivial distribution on the positive integers that makes the events "$p$ divides $X$" and "$q$ divides $X$" independent whenever $p,q$ are distinct primes. –  Kevin O'Bryant Aug 2 '10 at 2:57
    
Do you have a reference for that? As far as I can tell, it is not hard to construct distributions not of this form which don't satisfy the third requirement. I have read a statement like this in writing by Gian-Carlo Rota, but it was "subject to certain technical requirements" which I thought I had figured out. –  Qiaochu Yuan Aug 2 '10 at 3:23
    
My source is also Gian-Carlo Rota (some popular lectures he gave). He also has a paper wherein this distribution arises as a profinite completion. It was a short paper (4 or 5 pages), and I think published in the 1990s. –  Kevin O'Bryant Aug 2 '10 at 4:04
add comment

2 Answers

up vote 7 down vote accepted

...because for sets with logarithmic density, the logarithmic density and the $s\to1$ zeta-measure agree. And for sets with natural density, the logarithmic and natural densities are the same.

share|improve this answer
    
I know I left out Tate & Haar, but I don't think there's any call to bring them along. –  Kevin O'Bryant Aug 1 '10 at 23:20
    
This is a perfectly good answer, but it's a little unsatisfying for me. Presumably there are lots of notions of density that agree with and extend natural density. Why single out logarithmic density? –  Qiaochu Yuan Aug 2 '10 at 3:26
add comment

"This is also the unique nontrivial distribution on the positive integers that makes the events "p divides X" and "q divides X" independent whenever p,q are distinct primes."

Kevin, consider $X = \prod_{i=1}^\infty p_i^{N_i}$ where the $N$'s are independent, and $N_i$ has a Poisson distribution with parameter $p_i^{-s}$. It turns out this distribution is related to the exponential of the prime zeta function.

In fact, whenever you construct a probability distribution by normalising the terms of a convergent Dirichlet series with positive, multiplicitive coefficients, this property shows up. It's the subject of my MPhil thesis, which I may manage to post up on the arxiv sometime this century.

share|improve this answer
    
I agree. Rota's statement is a little unclear but I think I have found one way to make it precise here: qchu.wordpress.com/2010/11/14/… –  Qiaochu Yuan Nov 20 '10 at 13:44
    
So you're using the memoryless property of the geometric distribution in your post? –  Simon Lyons Nov 20 '10 at 17:19
    
I suppose so, yes. –  Qiaochu Yuan Nov 21 '10 at 1:58
add comment

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.