-4
$\begingroup$

There are many known nontrivial zeros of the Riemann Zeta function, but I have never seen proof that any of them actually resolve to zero. The trivial zeros make sense because there is a more complicated equation which represents the zeta function and in that equation all negative even integers resolve to 0.

Basically, is there proof that 14... times i plus 1/2 actually resolves to 0 in the zeta function? How do you know? What is the proof?

Is there proof that the non trivial zeros are actually zeros? If so, where is the proof? What is the evidence? Can anybody give one example???

$\endgroup$
2
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ I don't think this question is appropriate for MO, but here is a related Math.SE post which contains the answer to your question: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1903742/…. $\endgroup$
    – dhy
    Commented Jan 30, 2023 at 19:20
  • 8
    $\begingroup$ what about the zero of the function $e^x-2$? Do you believe that such exists and can be approximated to as many decimals you want, though being an irrational cannot be really written down except symbolically by giving it the name $\log 2$? Same with the RZ zeroes, one can write a real transcendental - of course more complicated - equation that gives all the ones on the critical line and one can prove by showing sign changes the existence of many zeroes and then one can use clever approximations to actually compute them to high accuracy as decimals and of course one can name as $\rho_n$ $\endgroup$
    – Conrad
    Commented Jan 30, 2023 at 19:28

1 Answer 1

6
$\begingroup$

For any function $f$ holomorphic on some domain $D$, the integral $$ \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{\partial D} \frac{df}{f} $$ is a nonnegative integer, and counts the number of zeros of $f$ in $D$. So if you can compute this integral to good enough precision, you know the exact number of zeroes in $D$. By taking $D$ a small enough disc around a suspected zero, you have a proof that there is actually a zero there.

Moreover, if $z$ is a zero of $\zeta$ such that $0<\Re(z)<1$, then $1-z$, $\overline{z}$, $1-\overline{z}$, are also zeroes in the same band (because of symmetries satisfied by the Zeta function). If there were a zero $z$ with $0<\Re(z)<1$, $\Im(z)=a$ and $\Re(z) \ne 1/2$, then $1-\overline{z}$ would be another zero satisfying the same conditions. For every small enough rectangle $R_\epsilon$ with vertices $a \pm i\epsilon$ and $1+a \pm i\epsilon$, $$ \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{\partial R_\epsilon} \frac{df}{f} $$ would be equal to $2$, and not to $1$.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ Nitpick: isn't this the number of simple zeros of $f$ in $D$? $\endgroup$
    – Yemon Choi
    Commented Jan 30, 2023 at 19:31
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ No, this formula count zeroes with their multiplicities. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 30, 2023 at 19:41
  • $\begingroup$ Oh of course, my bad. $\endgroup$
    – Yemon Choi
    Commented Jan 30, 2023 at 20:04

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .