Timeline for Why would the roots of the generating functions of the number of k-almost primes less than x have negative real parts?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 6, 2015 at 11:00 | vote | accept | Kevin Smith | ||
| Mar 5, 2015 at 19:05 | history | bounty ended | Kevin Smith | ||
| Mar 5, 2015 at 11:57 | comment | added | Kevin Smith | Thank you. I guess that the key to proving this is then finding enough control over the error term w.r.t the degree. | |
| Mar 5, 2015 at 11:57 | comment | added | Kevin Smith | Thank you. I guess that the key to proving this is then finding enough control over the error term w.r.t the degree. | |
| Mar 5, 2015 at 5:30 | comment | added | Lucia | @KevinSmith: I added some clarifications to the answer. | |
| Mar 5, 2015 at 5:29 | history | edited | Lucia | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 572 characters in body
|
| Mar 4, 2015 at 12:19 | comment | added | Kevin Smith | The librarian of the Indian mathematical society very kindly sent me a copy of Selberg's paper. I still don't see how the roots must be real for fixed $z$ and sufficiently large $x$. Would you explain why this is so please? | |
| Feb 28, 2015 at 23:44 | comment | added | Kevin Smith | Those results of Selberg and Deligne are incredible. I'd forgotten about them until you pointed out your observations here, which are in this new sense quite incredible too. I don't have copies of the papers at present but can you explain why this forces those roots in a bounded domain to be real for sufficiently large x? In answer to your question, non-real zeros do occur quite often in the range I've observed, but that doesn't count for much-the degree is still at most six. | |
| Feb 28, 2015 at 0:54 | history | answered | Lucia | CC BY-SA 3.0 |