Timeline for Philosophy behind Zhang's 2022 preprint on the Landau–Siegel zero
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
23 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 24, 2023 at 18:38 | history | edited | Stopple | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Removed broken link.
|
| Sep 24, 2023 at 18:37 | comment | added | Stopple | @TheAmplitwist You can get Stark's thesis via Interlibrary Loan from UC Berkeley. I can no longer find a copy online. (It's interesting reading.) | |
| Sep 24, 2023 at 9:29 | comment | added | The Amplitwist | The link to Stark's PhD thesis seems to be broken for me, possibly because of the proxy URL. | |
| Apr 24, 2023 at 16:34 | comment | added | kodlu | It was Non-positive sequences in analytic number theory and the Landau-Siegel zero Abstract: A number of problems in analytic number theory can be reduced to showing that some related sequences are non-positive. In this direction a typical treatment is based on the idea of the $\Lambda^2$-sieve due to Selberg. We introduce a new approach that may find application to the Landau-Siegel zero problem. | |
| Apr 24, 2023 at 16:33 | comment | added | kodlu | He gave a talk at Harvard mathpicture.fas.harvard.edu/event/… and as far as I could follow the work is still unfinished. | |
| Jan 19, 2023 at 13:51 | comment | added | Y. Zhao | Do we now know better whether Zhang's idea works or not? | |
| Nov 16, 2022 at 5:02 | comment | added | David Roberts♦ | There's an official translated version of some of Zhang's comments here: cantorsparadise.com/… | |
| Nov 15, 2022 at 19:39 | history | edited | Martin Sleziak |
edited tags
|
|
| Nov 15, 2022 at 13:46 | review | Close votes | |||
| Nov 21, 2022 at 3:03 | |||||
| Nov 15, 2022 at 4:06 | comment | added | D.R. | There are also some blog-posts (in particular one written by "Xinzhiyuan") on Zhihu summarizing one of Zhang's recent talks: zhihu.com/question/564799818, or translated: www-zhihu-com.translate.goog/question/… | |
| Nov 15, 2022 at 0:47 | history | edited | LSpice | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Links to articles; typo
|
| Nov 15, 2022 at 0:33 | comment | added | TravorLZH | Zhang himself gave a Chinese talk on Nov 8 to explain his motivation. Hopefully it helps somebody. | |
| S Nov 15, 2022 at 0:00 | history | suggested | J. W. Tanner | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
removed repeated word
|
| Nov 14, 2022 at 23:39 | comment | added | Terry Tao | The main thing that would make the verification process easier is the release of a carefully revised and proofread version of the manuscript by Yitang. For this, I believe it would be more efficacious if questions and concerns about the paper are communicated to Yitang by private channels, rather than public forums such as MathOverflow, which Yitang has not shown much prior interest in engaging with. | |
| Nov 14, 2022 at 22:58 | comment | added | mathworker21 | @TerryTao Why? I agree with your comment if this post and comment thread were people merely speculating about the correctness of the argument. This question is asking about the approach of the preprint. In fact, I think this will make the verification process easier. | |
| Nov 14, 2022 at 22:45 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Nov 15, 2022 at 0:00 | |||||
| Nov 14, 2022 at 21:36 | comment | added | Terry Tao | I would advise that public discussion of the preprint be postponed until there is reasonable consensus on the correctness of the manuscript (after the issues already located have been addressed by Yitang). I understand the excitement about this potentially significant result, but the slow, careful process of verifying (a hopefully forthcoming revision of) the manuscript still needs to be done, and too much premature public discussion of the preprint could in fact distract from and interfere with this necessary step. Check back in a month or so. | |
| Nov 14, 2022 at 19:40 | comment | added | Stopple | @Buzz No. We expect the zeros to be distributed like the eigenvalues of random matrices. This 'GUE hypothesis' is in contrast to the 'Alternative hypothesis' regular spacing caused (in some sense) by the Landau-Siegel zero. | |
| Nov 14, 2022 at 19:38 | comment | added | Wojowu | @Buzz No, it's correct as written. Siegel zero implies regular spacing, which is something we don't expect to be true, and by proving the spacing is not regular we show Siegel zero (or whatever "bad" zeros we concern here) cannot exist. | |
| Nov 14, 2022 at 19:34 | comment | added | Buzz | Is that supposed to be "that this regular spacing does happen" in the first sentence of the third paragraph? | |
| Nov 14, 2022 at 19:02 | comment | added | Sam Hopkins | You might also be interested in this blog comment from Terry Tao about how certain misprints in the preprint make it hard(er) to evaluate: terrytao.wordpress.com/2021/09/15/… | |
| Nov 14, 2022 at 18:59 | comment | added | Sam Hopkins | Other MO questions about this work: mathoverflow.net/questions/434287 mathoverflow.net/questions/434150 mathoverflow.net/questions/433949 mathoverflow.net/questions/131221. It's obviously exciting but we may be getting out over our skis in terms of the volume of speculation on this site about this announcement. | |
| Nov 14, 2022 at 18:48 | history | asked | Stopple | CC BY-SA 4.0 |