bio | website | |
---|---|---|
location | France | |
age | 32 | |
visits | member for | 3 years, 7 months |
seen | 55 mins ago | |
stats | profile views | 2,847 |
I'm a former student in physics fond of number theory, especially Hilbert's 8th problem, further generalizations of the Riemann Hypothesis and almost everything related to prime numbers and L Functions. I'm also interested in Galois Theory even though I still don't know much about it.
Oct 19 |
comment |
is there an analogy between fractals and automorphic forms?
Thank you very much for the reference. I'll try to order this book so as to have it for my birthday on November 3rd :-) |
Oct 19 |
asked | is there an analogy between fractals and automorphic forms? |
Oct 15 |
comment |
what would be the consequences on the distribution of primes of $\Lambda=\infty$?
Thank you very much for this wonderful answer. By the way, as English is not my mother tongue, can you tell me whether the spelling "zeros" is correct or not? I've had a doubt about it for quite a long time. |
Oct 15 |
accepted | what would be the consequences on the distribution of primes of $\Lambda=\infty$? |
Oct 15 |
asked | what would be the consequences on the distribution of primes of $\Lambda=\infty$? |
Sep 27 |
comment |
Special values of $\zeta$ outside the real line and the critical strip
I'd say ordinates rather than abscissae. |
Sep 24 |
awarded | Autobiographer |
Sep 23 |
accepted | is $x_{n}\ll \overline{x}_{n}^{2}$? |
Sep 23 |
comment |
is $x_{n}\ll \overline{x}_{n}^{2}$?
Thank you but does your proposed counterexample meet the requirement $n.\overline{x}_{n}\ll_{\varepsilon} n^{1+\varepsilon}$ for all $\varepsilon\gt 0$? It doesn't look obvious to me. |
Sep 23 |
comment |
is $x_{n}\ll \overline{x}_{n}^{2}$?
Not necessarily, indeed. |
Sep 23 |
comment |
is $x_{n}\ll \overline{x}_{n}^{2}$?
$x\ll y$ means the same thing as $x=O(y)$. I added the number theory tags as number theorists are rather familiar with this notation, and the terms of the sequence I consider are positive integers. |
Sep 23 |
asked | is $x_{n}\ll \overline{x}_{n}^{2}$? |
Sep 20 |
comment |
About Goldbach's conjecture
I did manage to establish the relation $r_{0}(n)=O(\log^{4} n)$ in my blog ideasfornumbertheory.wordpress.com. I don't know yet whether it implies the desired upper bound for $\alpha_{n}$ or not though. |
Aug 6 |
revised |
About Goldbach's conjecture
added 207 characters in body |
Aug 5 |
accepted | Best error terms for functions related to square free numbers |
Aug 5 |
comment |
The shortest interval for which the prime number theorem holds
My Robert&Collins dictionary confirms that the noun needs an 's'. It's the first time (and probably the last too) that I'm right against Terence Tao, but unfortunately not in number theory... |
Aug 5 |
comment |
The shortest interval for which the prime number theorem holds
Aside any mathematical consideration, and even though English is not my mother tongue, it seems that 'heuristic' is an adjective whereas the corresponding noun is 'heuristics' with an 's' as in 'physics'. Apart from that this question appears to be very interesting and I would be thrilled to learn that the considered heuristics would finally turn out to be correct. |
Aug 5 |
comment |
The shortest interval for which the prime number theorem holds
Simply a given non trivial zero of a given primitive L-function F should be analogous to an algebraic number determining its minimal polynomial and its different conjugates, which would be the other non trivial zeros of F in this analogy. |
Aug 5 |
asked | Best error terms for functions related to square free numbers |
Aug 5 |
comment |
The shortest interval for which the prime number theorem holds
I know, but Haseo Ki et al. suggest in an article about the unicity of l-functions in the extended Selberg class that it is likely that no two such L-functions share a non trivial zero. This would mean that a single non trivial zero determines entirely an l-function, and thus its non trivial zeros may depend on one another in some way. Moreover I shall give an argument in favor of the conjecture above when I'm back home. |