2
$\begingroup$

I am trying to understand the proof of Theorem 15.2 in the aforementioned book. In this proof, the authors seem to infer that, if $\psi(x) - x < x^{\Theta - \epsilon}$ for every $\epsilon > 0$ and sufficiently large $x$, then the function $f(s)=\int_{1} ^{\infty} (x^{\Theta - \epsilon} - \psi(x) + x)x^{-s-1} \mathrm{d}x$ is analytic in the half-plane $\Re(s)> \Theta-\epsilon$, where $\psi$ is the Chebyshev first function over prime powers.

But couldn't $\psi(x) -x$ be negative and large in absolute value, so that $f(s)$ would not be analytic in the said half-plane ? Or maybe I'm not understanding how they deduced the analyticity of $f(s)$ in that plane ?

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ Consider the displayed equation just below (15.3). The LHS is clearly analytic for $\Re(s)>\Theta-\varepsilon$. $\endgroup$
    – Wojowu
    Commented Mar 9, 2020 at 20:01
  • $\begingroup$ @Wojowu, yes. But as you can see in that proof, the initial equation was defined for $\Re(s)>1$, but then was extended to $\Re(s) > \Theta - \epsilon$. It seems they did this by applying the identity theorem for holomorphic functions (?), which requires both sides of the equation to be analytic for $\Re(s) > \Theta - \epsilon$ $\endgroup$
    – gp1
    Commented Mar 9, 2020 at 20:08
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @Wojowu: Initially, the LHS is only analytic in a neighborhood of the real interval $(\Theta-\varepsilon,\infty)$. So the RHS has analytic continuation to a neighborhood of the real interval $(\Theta-\varepsilon,\infty)$, hence by Lemma 15.1, also to the half-plane $\Re(s)>\Theta-\varepsilon$. It follows that the LHS is analytic in the half-plane $\Re(s)>\Theta-\varepsilon$, which contradicts the definition of $\Theta$. $\endgroup$
    – GH from MO
    Commented Mar 9, 2020 at 21:43
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @GHfromMO I see, thanks. I didn't quite realize Lemma 15.1 is crucial for this part of the argument. $\endgroup$
    – Wojowu
    Commented Mar 9, 2020 at 21:46
  • $\begingroup$ I explained in the previous remark what's going on. Bailleul explained the same in more detail (see his response). The point is to consider real values $s$ initially, then half-planes afterwards. $\endgroup$
    – GH from MO
    Commented Mar 9, 2020 at 21:46

1 Answer 1

8
$\begingroup$

It seems you are not using Lemma 15.1 correctly. For convenience I write $$\frac{1}{s - \Theta + \varepsilon} + \frac{\zeta'(s)}{s\zeta(s)} + \frac{1}{s-1} = \int_1^{+\infty} (x^{\Theta - \varepsilon} - \psi(x) + x) x^{-s-1} \, \mathrm{d}x. \quad (*)$$

Now the left-hand side of $(*)$ is analytic for real $s > \Theta - \varepsilon$ so Lemma 15.1 tells you that $\sigma_c \leq \Theta - \varepsilon$ (otherwise, since the RHS is analytic for $\mathfrak R(s) > \sigma_c$, the LHS, which coincides with the RHS for $\mathfrak{R}(s) > \sigma_c$ by the identity theorem, would have a singularity at $\sigma_c > \Theta - \varepsilon$).

Applying Lemma 15.1 once again yields that the LHS of $(*)$ is analytic for $\mathfrak R(s) > \Theta - \varepsilon$, which is a contradiction since $\zeta$ admits zeroes with $\mathfrak R(\rho) = \Theta - \varepsilon'$ for some $\varepsilon' < \varepsilon$.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

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