Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

hopefully knowing the zeta function

Expand Messages
  • leavemsg1
    ... ponder- ... the ... ...omit the restriction. The function should have been f(1/a + bi) = a * g(1+abi) ... it. ... de- ... real ... my ... made ... the ...
    Message 1 of 2 , Sep 6, 2006
      --- In primenumbers@yahoogroups.com, "leavemsg1" <leavemsg1@...>
      > I wrote to Dr. Math on 9/6/06... today.
      > He asked... What is your question?
      > I wrote:
      > I see the many definitions that math books are filled with and
      > ed one myself. I call it the ideal zero asymmetrical range of a
      > complex function. It happens only when the following condition is
      > met. The function f(x) has an IZAR when f(a+bi) = a*g(bi) where
      > function g(x) strictly cannot be written as g(a+bi).

      ...omit the restriction.

      The function should have been f(1/a + bi) = a * g(1+abi)

      > I believe that
      > if this condition has been met that the range of the function f(x)
      > must have an ideal zero asymmetrical range about the value 'a' on

      ...and the value of asymmetrical interest should have been '1/a'

      > its complex graph.
      > He said... Tell me what you find most difficult or confusing about
      > I wrote:
      > It is my belief that Riemann saw this condition but wasn't able to
      > define it, because the zeta function had gained so much popularity
      > with its connection to prime numbers. I want to believe that my
      > finition could be as fundamental for complex numbers as are the
      > number definitions for monoids, groups, rings, etc. in mathematics.
      > He said... show me your work...
      > I replied...
      > After evaluating the zeta function for z(1/2+it), we get...
      > 2))))))))))))))4
      > ------- + ------------- + ...
      > (1+2it) (1 + 2it)^2

      ... I changed this series to agree with the above changes ...

      > and 2 * g(1+2it) is the only way to factor out 2 from f(1/2+it) so

      ... this was also corrected to yield more clarity ...

      > by definition the ideal zero asymmetrical range must exist. It's
      > belief that several manipulations of the zeta function have been
      > in an effort to solve the problem and that definitions similar to
      > zero domain for real functions, etc. haven't been explored in the
      > sense of the range of complex functions. It's been overlooked.
      > I'm waiting for Dr. Rob's stimulating conversation... I won't be
      > writing for a while... math is not my idea of fun... just under-
      > standing. Bill Semper paratus.

      I haven't heard from Dr. Rob and think that he will either find the
      corrections to my original letter or skip the question entirely.

      Bill finally I clarified it for those in the group and myself
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.