Timeline for Shortest/Most elegant proof for $L(1,\chi)\neq 0$
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 1, 2019 at 7:50 | comment | added | KConrad | @JoséHdz.Stgo. the hyperlink you gave no longer works (inevitable). A working hyperlink, for now, to the general L'Enseignement Mathématique archive is e-periodica.ch/digbib/vollist?UID=ens-001 and a link to Narasimhan's paper is e-periodica.ch/digbib/view?pid=ens-001:1968:14 (scroll to page 189) and a link to Bateman's paper is e-periodica.ch/digbib/view?pid=ens-001:1997:43 (scroll to page 281). | |
| Mar 30, 2012 at 21:29 | comment | added | José Hdz. Stgo. | retro.seals.ch/digbib/… | |
| Mar 27, 2012 at 21:40 | comment | added | C.S. | @KConrad: I cant find the link on MathSciNet. What is the name of the paper. | |
| May 27, 2010 at 4:50 | history | edited | José Hdz. Stgo. | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
deleted 238 characters in body
|
| May 26, 2010 at 23:13 | history | edited | José Hdz. Stgo. | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 20 characters in body
|
| May 24, 2010 at 23:11 | comment | added | KConrad | Yes, Narasimhan's argument for showing the Riemann zeta function doesn't vanish on the line Re(s) = 1 is really nice. See L'Enseignement Math. (2) 14 1968 189--191 (1969). Or MathSciNet MR0249373. | |
| May 24, 2010 at 23:01 | comment | added | Brad Rodgers | A google search reveals it is " L'Enseignement Mathématique." I have to admit, I prefer Ingham's original proof, which I'm posting below (if no one beats me to it). | |
| May 24, 2010 at 23:00 | history | edited | José Hdz. Stgo. | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 104 characters in body; added 16 characters in body
|
| May 24, 2010 at 22:49 | history | answered | José Hdz. Stgo. | CC BY-SA 2.5 |