hopefully knowing the zeta function
- --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "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 athe
> 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...and the value of asymmetrical interest should have been '1/a'
> 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
> its complex graph.it.
> 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 thereal
> number definitions for monoids, groups, rings, etc. in mathematics.... I changed this series to agree with the above changes ...
> He said... show me your work...
> I replied...
> After evaluating the zeta function for z(1/2+it), we get...
> ------- + ------------- + ...
> (1+2it) (1 + 2it)^2
>... this was also corrected to yield more clarity ...
> and 2 * g(1+2it) is the only way to factor out 2 from f(1/2+it) so
> by definition the ideal zero asymmetrical range must exist. It'smy
> belief that several manipulations of the zeta function have beenmade
> in an effort to solve the problem and that definitions similar tothe
> zero domain for real functions, etc. haven't been explored in theI haven't heard from Dr. Rob and think that he will either find 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.
corrections to my original letter or skip the question entirely.
Bill finally I clarified it for those in the group and myself