A Proof Of The Riemann Hypothesis Based On A New Expression Of The Completed Zeta Function

Preprint

Article

A Proof Of The Riemann Hypothesis Based On A New Expression Of The Completed Zeta Function

Altmetrics

Downloads

8183

Views

71564

Comments

Weicun Zhang^*

This version is not peer-reviewed

This preprints belongs to the Collection

Preprints.org 2023 Most Popular Preprints Award Winner Collection

Submitted:

12 October 2023

Posted:

16 October 2023

Read the latest preprint version here

Alerts

Abstract

The celebrated Riemann Hypothesis (RH) is proved based on a new absolute convergent expression of $\xi(s)$, which was obtained from the Hadamard product, through paring $\rho_i$ and $\bar{\rho}_i$, and putting all the multiple zeros together in one factor, i.e. $$\xi(s)=\xi(0)\prod_{\rho}(1-\frac{s}{\rho})=\xi(0)\prod_{i=1}^{\infty}\Big{(}\frac{\beta_i^2}{\alpha_i^2+\beta_i^2}+\frac{(s-\alpha_i)^2}{\alpha_i^2+\beta_i^2}\Big{)}^{d_{i}}$$ where $\xi(0)=\frac{1}{2}$, $\rho_i=\alpha_i+j\beta_i$ and $\bar{\rho}_i=\alpha_i-j\beta_i$ are the complex conjugate zeros of $\xi(s)$, $0<\alpha_i<1$ and $\beta_i\neq 0$ are real numbers, $d_i\geq 1$ is the real (\textbf{unique and unchangeable}) multiplicity of $\rho_i$, $\beta_i$ are arranged in order of increasing $|\beta_i|$, i.e., $|\beta_1|\leq|\beta_2|\leq|\beta_3|\leq \cdots$, $i =1,2,3, \cdots, \infty$.\\ Then, according to the functional equation $\xi(s)=\xi(1-s)$, we have $$\prod_{i=1}^{\infty}\Big{(}1+\frac{(s-\alpha_i)^2}{\beta_i^2}\Big{)}^{d_{i}}=\prod_{i=1}^{\infty}\Big{(}1+\frac{(1-s-\alpha_i)^2}{\beta_i^2}\Big{)}^{d_{i}}$$ which, owing to the uniqueness and unchangeableness of $d_i$ (see Lemma 3 for the proof details), is finally equivalent to $$\begin{cases}&\alpha_i=\frac{1}{2}\\ & |\beta_1|<|\beta_2|<|\beta_3|<\cdots\\&i =1,2,3, \cdots, \infty \end{cases}$$ Thus, we conclude that the RH is true.

Keywords:

Subject: Computer Science and Mathematics - Algebra and Number Theory

MSC: 11M26

1. Introduction

It has been more than 160 years since the RH was proposed in Riemann’s paper in 1859 ^[1]. Many efforts and achievements have been made towards proving this celebrated hypothesis, but it still remains an open problem ^[2−3].

The Riemann zeta function is originally defined in the half-plane

ℜ (s) > 1

by the absolutely convergent series ^[2]

ζ (s) = \sum_{n = 1}^{\infty} \frac{1}{n^{s}}, ℜ (s) > 1

(1)

The connection between the above-defined Riemann zeta function and prime numbers was discovered by Euler, i.e., the famous Euler product

ζ (s) = \sum_{n = 1}^{\infty} \frac{1}{n^{s}} = \prod_{p} {(1 - p^{- s})}^{- 1}, ℜ (s) > 1

(2)

where p runs over the prime numbers.

Riemann showed in his paper in 1859 how to extend the zeta function to the whole complex plane

C

by analytic continuation, i.e.

ζ (s) = \frac{Γ (1 - s)}{2 π i} \int_{\infty}^{\infty} \frac{{(- x)}^{s}}{e^{x} - 1} \cdot \frac{d x}{x}

(3a)

where

” \int_{\infty}^{\infty} ”

is the symbol adopted by Riemann to represent the contour integral from

+ \infty

+ \infty

around a domain which includes the value 0 but no other point of discontinuity of the integrand in its interior.

Or equivalently,

ζ (s) = \frac{π^{s / 2}}{Γ (s / 2)} {\frac{1}{s (s - 1)} + \int_{1}^{\infty} (x^{\frac{s}{2} - 1} + x^{- \frac{s}{2} - \frac{1}{2}}) \cdot (\frac{θ (x) - 1}{2}) d x}

(3b)

where

θ (x) = \sum_{- \infty}^{\infty} e^{- n^{2} π x}

is the Jaccobi theta function,

Γ

is the Gamma function in the following Weierstrass expression

\frac{1}{Γ (s)} = s \cdot e^{γ s} \prod_{n = 1}^{\infty} (1 + \frac{s}{n}) e^{- s / n}

(4)

where

γ

is the Euler-Mascheroni constant.

As shown by Riemann,

ζ (s)

extends to

C

as a meromorphic function with only a simple pole at

s = 1

, with residue 1, and satisfies the following functional equation

π^{- \frac{s}{2}} Γ (\frac{s}{2}) ζ (s) = π^{- \frac{1 - s}{2}} Γ (\frac{1 - s}{2}) ζ (1 - s)

(5)

The Riemann zeta function

ζ (s)

has zeros at the negative even integers:

- 2

- 4

- 6

- 8

, ⋯ and one refers to them as the trivial zeros. The other zeros of

ζ (s)

are the complex numbers, i.e., non-trivial zeros ^[2].

In 1896, Hadamard ^[4] and Poussin ^[5] independently proved that no zeros could lie on the line

ℜ (s) = 1

, together with the functional equation

ξ (s) = ξ (1 - s)

and the fact that there are no zeros with real part greater than 1, this showed that all non-trivial zeros must lie in the interior of the critical strip

0 < ℜ (s) < 1

. This was a key step in their first proofs of the famous Prime Number Theorem.

Later on, Hardy (1914) ^[6], Hardy and Littlewood (1921) ^[7] showed that there are infinitely many zeros on the critical line

ℜ (s) = \frac{1}{2}

, which was an astonishing result at that time.

To give a summary of the related research on the RH, we have the following results on the properties of the non-trivial zeros of

ζ (s)

^[4−9].

Lemma 1: Non-trivial zeroes of

ζ (s)

, noted as

ρ = α + j β

, have the following properties

1): The number of non-trivial zeroes is infinity;
2): $β \neq 0$ ;
3): $0 < α < 1$ ;
4): $ρ, \bar{ρ}, 1 - \bar{ρ}, 1 - ρ$ are all non-trivial zeroes.

As further study, a completed zeta function

ξ (s)

is defined as

ξ (s) = \frac{1}{2} s (s - 1) π^{- \frac{s}{2}} Γ (\frac{s}{2}) ζ (s)

(6)

It is well-known that

ξ (s)

is an entire function of order 1. This implies

ξ (s)

is analytic, and can be expressed as infinite polynomial, in the whole complex plane

C

In addition, replacing s with

1 - s

in Eq.(6), and combining Eq.(5), we obtain the following functional equation

ξ (s) = ξ (1 - s)

(7)

Considering the definition of

ξ (s)

, and recalling Eq.(4), the trivial zeros of

ζ (s)

are canceled by the poles of

Γ (\frac{s}{2})

. The zero of

s - 1

and the pole of

ζ (s)

cancel; the zero

s = 0

and the pole of

Γ (\frac{s}{2})

cancel ^[9−10]. Thus, all the zeros of

ξ (s)

are exactly the nontrivial zeros of

ζ (s)

. Then we have the following Lemma 2.

Lemma 2: The zeros of

ξ (s)

coincide with the non-trivial zeros of

ζ (s)

Accordingly, the following two statements of the RH are equivalent.

Statement 1: All the non-trivial zeros of

ζ (s)

have real part equal to

\frac{1}{2}

Statement 2: All the zeros of

ξ (s)

have real part equal to

\frac{1}{2}

To prove the RH, a natural thinking is to estimate the numbers of non-trivial zeros of

ζ (s)

inside or outside some areas according to Argument Principle. Along this train of thought, there are many research works. Let

N (T)

denote the number of zeros of

ζ (s)

inside the rectangle:

0 < α < 1, 0 < β \leq T

, and let

N_{0} (T)

denote the number of zeros of

ζ (s)

on the line

α = \frac{1}{2}, 0 < β \leq T

. Selberg proved that there exist positive constants c and

T_{0}

, such that

N_{0} (T) > c N (T), (T > T_{0})

^[11], later on, Levinson proved that

c \geq \frac{1}{3}

^[12], Lou and Yao proved that

c \geq 0.3484

^[13], Conrey proved that

c \geq \frac{2}{5}

^[14], Bui, Conrey and Young proved that

c \geq 0.41

^[15], Feng proved that

c \geq 0.4128

^[16], Wu proved that

c \geq 0.4172

^[17].

On the other hand, many zeros have been calculated by hand or by computer programs. Among others, Riemann found the first three non-trivial zeros ^[18]. Gram found the first 15 zeros based on Euler-Maclaurin summation ^[19]. Titchmarsh calculated the 138^th to 195^th zeros using the Riemann-Siegel formula ^[20−21]. Here are the first three (pairs of) zeros:

\frac{1}{2} \pm j 14.1347251; \frac{1}{2} \pm j 21.0220396; \frac{1}{2} \pm j 25.0108575

The idea of this paper is originated from Euler’s work on proving the following famous equality

1 + \frac{1}{2^{2}} + \frac{1}{3^{2}} + \frac{1}{4^{2}} + \frac{1}{5^{2}} + \dots = \frac{π^{2}}{6}

(8)

This interesting result is deduced by comparing the like terms of two types of infinite expressions, i.e., infinite polynomial and infinite product, as shown in the following

\begin{matrix} \frac{sin x}{x} & = 1 - \frac{x^{2}}{3!} + \frac{x^{4}}{5!} - \frac{x^{6}}{7!} + \dots \\ = (1 - \frac{x^{2}}{π^{2}}) (1 - \frac{x^{2}}{4 π^{2}}) (1 - \frac{x^{2}}{9 π^{2}}) \dots \end{matrix}

(9)

Then the author of this paper conjectured that

ξ (s)

should be factored into

(1 + \frac{{(s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})

or something like that, which was verified by paring

ρ_{i}

and

{\bar{ρ}}_{i}

in the Hadamard product of

ξ (s)

, i.e.

(1 - \frac{s}{ρ_{i}}) (1 - \frac{s}{{\bar{ρ}}_{i}}) = \frac{β_{i}^{2}}{α_{i}^{2} + β_{i}^{2}} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})

The Hadamard product of

ξ (s)

as shown in Eq.(10) was first proposed by Riemann, however, it was Hadamard who showed the validity of this infinite product expansion ^[22].

ξ (s) = ξ (0) \prod_{ρ} (1 - \frac{s}{ρ})

(10)

where

ξ (0) = \frac{1}{2}

ρ

runs over all the non-trivial zeros of the Riemann zeta function

ζ (s)

, or in another word,

ρ

runs over all the zeros of the completed zeta function

ξ (s)

Hadamard pointed out that to ensure the absolute convergence of the infinite product expansion,

ρ

and

1 - ρ

are paired. Later in Section 3, we will show that

ρ

and

\bar{ρ}

can also be paired to ensure the absolute convergence of the infinite product expansion.

2. Lemmas

In this section, we first explain the concept of the real multiplicity of a zero of

ξ (s)

. And then we give four lemmas (Lemma 3 to Lemma 6) to support the proof of the RH, among which Lemma 3 is the key lemma.

Multiple zeros of $ξ (s)$ : As shown in Figure 1, the multiple zeros of

ξ (s)

are defined in terms of the quadruplet, i.e.,

ρ, \bar{ρ}, 1 - ρ, 1 - \bar{ρ}

Figure 1. Illustration of the multiple zeros of

ξ (s)

Figure 1. Illustration of the multiple zeros of

ξ (s)

It should be noticed that zeros and their real multiplicities of

ξ (s) / ξ (1 - s)

are objective existence, but the expression of the corresponding factors of

ξ (s) / ξ (1 - s)

are optional to some extent. For example, the multiple zeros as shown in Figure 1 have two different expressions as factors of

ξ (s) / ξ (1 - s)

, respectively, i.e.,

(1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})^{2} / (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})^{2}

, or

(1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}) / (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}})

with

α_{1} + α_{2} = 1, β_{1}^{2} = β_{2}^{2}

To exclude the latter expression, we stipulate that zero

ρ_{i}

(with its real multiplicity

d_{i} \geq 1

) related factors of

ξ (s) / ξ (1 - s)

take the unique form of

(1 + \frac{{(s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} / (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})^{d_{i}}

Remark: Although the multiplicity

d_{i}

of zero

ρ_{i}

is unknown, it is an objective existence, unique, and unchangeable. This is the key point in the proofs of Lemma 3, Lemma 5, and Lemma 6.

Lemma 3: Given two infinite products

f (s) = \prod_{i = 1}^{\infty} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}}

(11)

and

f (1 - s) = \prod_{i = 1}^{\infty} (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}}

(12)

where s is a complex variable,

ρ_{i} = α_{i} + j β_{i}

and

{\bar{ρ}}_{i} = α_{i} - j β_{i}

are the complex conjugate zeros of

ξ (s)

0 < α_{i} < 1

and

β_{i} \neq 0

are real numbers,

d_{i} \geq 1

are the real multiplicities of

ρ_{i}

β_{i}

are in order of increasing

| β_{i} |

, i.e.,

| β_{1} | \leq | β_{2} | \leq | β_{3} | \leq \dots

i = 1, 2, 3, \dots, \infty

Then we have

f (s) = f (1 - s) \Leftrightarrow \{\begin{matrix} α_{i} = \frac{1}{2} \\ | β_{1} | < | β_{2} | < | β_{3} | < \dots \\ i = 1, 2, 3, \dots, \infty \end{matrix}

(13)

where

” \Leftrightarrow ”

is the equivalent sign.

Proof: First of all, we have the following fact:

\begin{matrix} (1 + \frac{{(s - α)}^{2}}{β^{2}})^{d} = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α)}^{2}}{β^{2}})^{d} \\ \Leftrightarrow {(s - α)}^{2} = {(1 - s - α)}^{2} \Leftrightarrow α = \frac{1}{2} \end{matrix}

(14)

where

d \geq 1

is a natural number,

α \neq 0

and

β \neq 0

are real numbers.

Next, the proof is based on Transfinite Induction.

Let

P (n)

be:

\begin{matrix} \prod_{i = 1}^{n} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} = \prod_{i = 1}^{n} (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} \\ \Leftrightarrow \\ \{\begin{matrix} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})^{d_{1}} = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})^{d_{1}} \\ \dots \\ (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{n})}^{2}}{β_{n}^{2}})^{d_{n}} = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{n})}^{2}}{β_{n}^{2}})^{d_{n}} \\ | β_{1} | < | β_{2} | < | β_{3} | < \dots < | β_{n} | \end{matrix} \\ \Leftrightarrow \\ \{\begin{matrix} α_{i} = \frac{1}{2}, i = 1 \dots n \\ | β_{1} | < | β_{2} | < | β_{3} | < \dots < | β_{n} | \end{matrix} \end{matrix}

(15)

According to Eq.(14),

P (1)

is an obvious fact as the Base Case, i.e.,

\begin{matrix} \prod_{i = 1}^{1} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} = \prod_{i = 1}^{1} (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} \\ \Leftrightarrow (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})^{d_{1}} = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})^{d_{1}} \\ \Leftrightarrow α_{1} = \frac{1}{2} \end{matrix}

(16)

To be more convincing, let’s further check

P (2)

, i.e.,

\begin{matrix} \prod_{i = 1}^{2} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} = \prod_{i = 1}^{2} (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} \\ \Leftrightarrow \\ \{\begin{matrix} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})^{d_{1}} = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})^{d_{1}} \\ (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}})^{d_{2}} = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}})^{d_{2}} \\ | β_{1} | < | β_{2} | \end{matrix} \\ \Leftrightarrow \\ \{\begin{matrix} α_{1} = α_{2} = \frac{1}{2} \\ | β_{1} | < | β_{2} | \end{matrix} \end{matrix}

(17)

which is also an obvious fact according to Lemma 5.

As the Successor Case, we need to prove

P (n) \Rightarrow P (n + 1)

Actually, we have

\begin{matrix} \prod_{i = 1}^{n + 1} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} = \prod_{i = 1}^{n + 1} (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} \\ \Leftrightarrow (by Lemma 6) \\ \{\begin{matrix} \prod_{i = 1}^{n} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} = \prod_{i = 1}^{n} (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} \\ (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{n + 1})}^{2}}{β_{n + 1}^{2}})^{d_{n + 1}} = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{n + 1})}^{2}}{β_{n + 1}^{2}})^{d_{n + 1}} \\ | β_{1} | < | β_{2} | < | β_{3} | < \dots < | β_{n} | < | β_{n + 1} | \end{matrix} \\ \Leftrightarrow (by Eq . (15)) \\ \{\begin{matrix} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})^{d_{1}} = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})^{d_{1}} \\ \dots \\ (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{n + 1})}^{2}}{β_{n + 1}^{2}})^{d_{n + 1}} = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{n + 1})}^{2}}{β_{n + 1}^{2}})^{d_{n + 1}} \\ | β_{1} | < | β_{2} | < | β_{3} | < \dots < | β_{n} | < | β_{n + 1} | \end{matrix} \\ \Leftrightarrow (by Eq . (14)) \\ \{\begin{matrix} α_{i} = \frac{1}{2}, i = 1, 2, 3, \dots, n, n + 1 \\ | β_{1} | < | β_{2} | < | β_{3} | < \dots < | β_{n} | < | β_{n + 1} | \end{matrix} \end{matrix}

(18)

Thus the Successor Case is true, i.e.,

P (n) \Rightarrow P (n + 1)

Next, we prove that

P (\infty)

holds, by considering well-ordered ordinal set A indexing the family of statements

P (γ : γ \in A)

A = N ⋃ {ω}

with the ordering that

n < ω

for all natural numbers n,

ω

is the first limit ordinal.

It is well-known that

ω = ⋃ {γ : γ < ω}

To prove that

P (\infty)

holds, it suffices to prove the Limit Case, i.e.,

P (γ < ω) \Rightarrow P (ω)

Actually, we have

\begin{matrix} \prod_{i = 1}^{ω} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} = \prod_{i = 1}^{ω} (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} \\ \Leftrightarrow \\ \prod_{i = 1}^{γ < ω} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{ω})}^{2}}{β_{ω}^{2}})^{d_{ω}} = \prod_{i = 1}^{γ < ω} (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{ω})}^{2}}{β_{ω}^{2}})^{d_{ω}} \\ \Leftrightarrow (by Lemma 6) \\ \{\begin{matrix} \prod_{i = 1}^{γ < ω} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} = \prod_{i = 1}^{γ < ω} (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} \\ (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{ω})}^{2}}{β_{ω}^{2}})^{d_{ω}} = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{ω})}^{2}}{β_{ω}^{2}})^{d_{ω}} \\ | β_{1} | < | β_{2} | < | β_{3} | < \dots < | β_{ω} | \end{matrix} \\ \Leftrightarrow (by P (γ < ω)) \\ \{\begin{matrix} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})^{d_{1}} = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})^{d_{1}} \\ \dots \\ (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{ω})}^{2}}{β_{ω}^{2}})^{d_{ω}} = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{ω})}^{2}}{β_{ω}^{2}})^{d_{ω}} \\ | β_{1} | < | β_{2} | < | β_{3} | < \dots < | β_{ω} | \end{matrix} \\ \Leftrightarrow (by Eq . (14)) \\ \{\begin{matrix} α_{i} = \frac{1}{2}, i = 1, 2, 3, \dots, ω \\ | β_{1} | < | β_{2} | < | β_{3} | < \dots < | β_{ω} | \end{matrix} \end{matrix}

(19)

Thus the Limit Case is true, i.e.,

P (γ < ω) \Rightarrow P (ω)

Hence, we conclude by Transfinite Induction that

P (\infty)

holds, i.e.,

\begin{matrix} \prod_{i = 1}^{\infty} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} = \prod_{i = 1}^{\infty} (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} \\ \Leftrightarrow \\ \{\begin{matrix} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} \\ | β_{1} | < | β_{2} | < | β_{3} | < \dots \\ i = 1, 2, 3, \dots, \infty \end{matrix} \\ \Leftrightarrow \\ \{\begin{matrix} α_{i} = \frac{1}{2} \\ | β_{1} | < | β_{2} | < | β_{3} | < \dots \\ i = 1, 2, 3, \dots, \infty \end{matrix} \end{matrix}

(20)

i.e.,

f (s) = f (1 - s) \Leftrightarrow \{\begin{matrix} α_{i} = \frac{1}{2} \\ | β_{1} | < | β_{2} | < | β_{3} | < \dots \\ i = 1, 2, 3, \dots, \infty \end{matrix}

(21)

That completes the proof of Lemma 3.

Lemma 4: Given

(1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}) = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}})

(22)

where s is a complex variable,

0 < α_{1} < 1, 0 < α_{2} < 1

and

β_{1} \neq 0, β_{2} \neq 0

are real numbers,

| β_{1} | \leq | β_{2} |

Then we have

\begin{matrix} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}) = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}) \\ \Leftrightarrow \\ \{\begin{matrix} α_{1} = α_{2} = \frac{1}{2}, & | β_{1} | \leq | β_{2} | \\ α_{1} + α_{2} = 1, & | β_{1} | = | β_{2} | \end{matrix} \\ \Leftrightarrow \\ \{\begin{matrix} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}), (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}) = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}), & | β_{1} | \leq | β_{2} | \\ (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}), (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}) = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}), & | β_{1} | = | β_{2} | \end{matrix} \end{matrix}

(23)

Proof: Expanding both sides of Eq.(22), and comparing the coefficients of like terms, we obtain (details are omitted to save space)

\begin{matrix} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}) = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}) \\ \Rightarrow \\ \{\begin{matrix} α_{1} = α_{2} = \frac{1}{2}, & | β_{1} | \leq | β_{2} | \\ α_{1} + α_{2} = 1, & | β_{1} | = | β_{2} | \end{matrix} \end{matrix}

(24)

The inverse inference of Eq.(24) is also an obvious fact. i.e.,

\begin{matrix} \{\begin{matrix} α_{1} = α_{2} = \frac{1}{2}, & | β_{1} | \leq | β_{2} | \\ α_{1} + α_{2} = 1, & | β_{1} | = | β_{2} | \end{matrix} \\ \Rightarrow \\ (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}) = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}) \end{matrix}

Then we have

\begin{matrix} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}) = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}) \\ \Leftrightarrow \\ \{\begin{matrix} α_{1} = α_{2} = \frac{1}{2}, & | β_{1} | \leq | β_{2} | \\ α_{1} + α_{2} = 1, & | β_{1} | = | β_{2} | \end{matrix} \end{matrix}

(25)

Further, according to Eq.(14), i.e.,

(1 + \frac{{(s - α)}^{2}}{β^{2}})^{d} = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α)}^{2}}{β^{2}})^{d} \Leftrightarrow α = \frac{1}{2}

and the following similar facts

(1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}) \Leftrightarrow α_{1} + α_{2} = 1, | β_{1} | = | β_{2} |

(1 + \frac{{(s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}) = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) \Leftrightarrow α_{1} + α_{2} = 1, | β_{1} | = | β_{2} |

we have

\begin{matrix} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}) = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}) \\ \Leftrightarrow \\ \{\begin{matrix} α_{1} = α_{2} = \frac{1}{2}, & | β_{1} | \leq | β_{2} | \\ α_{1} + α_{2} = 1, & | β_{1} | = | β_{2} | \end{matrix} \\ \Leftrightarrow \\ \{\begin{matrix} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}), (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}) = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}), & | β_{1} | \leq | β_{2} | \\ (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}), (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}) = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}), & | β_{1} | = | β_{2} | \end{matrix} \end{matrix}

(26)

That completes the proof of Lemma 4.

Remark: Lemma 4 can also be proved through polynomial division, i.e.

\begin{matrix} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}) = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}) \\ \Leftrightarrow \\ \{\begin{matrix} \frac{(1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})}{(1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})} = \frac{(1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}})}{(1 + \frac{{(s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}})} = k \\ \frac{(1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})}{(1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}})} = \frac{(1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})}{(1 + \frac{{(s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}})} = k^{'} \end{matrix} \\ \Leftrightarrow (k and k^{'} can be further determined to be 1 by comparing the like terms of polynomials .) \\ \{\begin{matrix} α_{1} = α_{2} = \frac{1}{2}, | β_{1} | \leq | β_{2} | \\ α_{1} + α_{2} = 1, | β_{1} | = | β_{2} | \end{matrix} \end{matrix}

Remark: Lemma 4 reveals an interesting fact that there are only two solutions to Eq. (22), i.e., Solution 1:

(1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})

(1 + \frac{{(s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}) = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}})

; Solution 2:

(1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}})

(1 + \frac{{(s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}) = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})

. This result is quite different from the similar equation of products of real number factors

a_{1} \cdot a_{2} = b_{1} \cdot b_{2}

, which has infinitely many solutions for real numbers

a_{1}, a_{2}, b_{1}, b_{2}

Lemma 5: Given

(1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})^{d_{1}} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}})^{d_{2}} = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})^{d_{1}} (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}})^{d_{2}}

(27)

where s is a complex variable,

0 < α_{1} < 1, 0 < α_{2} < 1

and

β_{1} \neq 0, β_{2} \neq 0

are real numbers,

d_{1} \geq 1, d_{2} \geq 1

are natural numbers, denoting the real multiplicities of

ρ_{1} = α_{1} + j β_{1}

and

ρ_{2} = α_{2} + j β_{2}

, respectively,

| β_{1} | \leq | β_{2} |

Then we have

\begin{matrix} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})^{d_{1}} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}})^{d_{2}} = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})^{d_{1}} (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}})^{d_{2}} \\ \Leftrightarrow \\ \{\begin{matrix} α_{1} = α_{2} = \frac{1}{2} \\ | β_{1} | < | β_{2} | \end{matrix} \\ \Leftrightarrow \\ \{\begin{matrix} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})^{d_{1}} = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})^{d_{1}} \\ (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}})^{d_{2}} = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}})^{d_{2}} \\ | β_{1} | < | β_{2} | \end{matrix} \end{matrix}

(28)

Proof: It is obvious that Eq.(22) is a special case of Eq.(27), i.e.,

d_{1} = d_{2} = 1

. Then we know that the solution of Eq.(27) must be the solution of Eq.(22). Accordingly, the solutions of Eq.(27) can not exceeds the solutions of Eq.(22), otherwise contradictions occur.

On the other hand, the former part of the solutions of Eq. (22), i.e.

\{\begin{matrix} α_{1} = α_{2} = \frac{1}{2} \\ | β_{1} | \leq | β_{2} | \end{matrix} \Leftrightarrow \{\begin{matrix} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) \\ (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}) = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}) \\ | β_{1} | \leq | β_{2} | \end{matrix}

(29)

is an obvious solution of Eq.(27), and the latter part of the solutions of Eq.(22), i.e.

\{\begin{matrix} α_{1} + α_{2} = 1 \\ | β_{1} | = | β_{2} | \end{matrix} \Leftrightarrow \{\begin{matrix} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}) \\ (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}}) = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}}) \\ | β_{1} | = | β_{2} | \end{matrix}

contradicts the fact in Eq. (27) that the real multiplicities of

ρ_{1} = α_{1} + j β_{1}

and

ρ_{2} = α_{2} + j β_{2}

are

d_{1}

and

d_{2}

, respectively.

Further, excluding the similar contradictory situation in Eq.(29), i.e.,

α_{1} = α_{2} = \frac{1}{2}, | β_{1} | = | β_{2} |

, then we know that Eq.(28) holds.

That completes the proof of Lemma 5.

Remark: Lemma 5 can also be proved through polynomial division, i.e.

\begin{matrix} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})^{d_{1}} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}})^{d_{2}} = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})^{d_{1}} (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}})^{d_{2}} \\ \Leftrightarrow (Other possible polynomial divisions are excluded to avoid the violation of the real \\ multiplicities of zeros .) \\ \{\begin{matrix} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})^{d_{1}} / (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{1})}^{2}}{β_{1}^{2}})^{d_{1}} = k \\ (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}})^{d_{2}} / (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{2})}^{2}}{β_{2}^{2}})^{d_{2}} = k \\ | β_{1} | < | β_{2} | \end{matrix} \\ \Leftrightarrow (k can be further determined to be 1 by comparing the like terms of polynomials .) \\ \{\begin{matrix} α_{1} = α_{2} = \frac{1}{2} \\ | β_{1} | < | β_{2} | \end{matrix} \end{matrix}

Along the same line of thought, we have the following extended result of Lemma 5 without proof details.

Lemma 6: We have the fact

\begin{matrix} \prod_{i = 1}^{n + 1} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} = \prod_{i = 1}^{n + 1} (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} \\ \Leftrightarrow \\ \prod_{i = 1}^{n} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{n + 1})}^{2}}{β_{n + 1}^{2}})^{d_{n + 1}} = \prod_{i = 1}^{n} (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{n + 1})}^{2}}{β_{n + 1}^{2}})^{d_{n + 1}} \\ \Leftrightarrow \\ \{\begin{matrix} \prod_{i = 1}^{n} (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} = \prod_{i = 1}^{n} (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} \\ (1 + \frac{{(s - α_{n + 1})}^{2}}{β_{n + 1}^{2}})^{d_{n + 1}} = (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{n + 1})}^{2}}{β_{n + 1}^{2}})^{d_{n + 1}} \\ | β_{1} | < | β_{2} | < | β_{3} | < \dots < | β_{n} | < | β_{n + 1} | \end{matrix} \end{matrix}

where s is a complex variable,

0 < α_{i} < 1

, and

β_{i} \neq 0

are real numbers,

d_{i} \geq 1

are natural numbers, denoting the real multiplicities of

ρ_{i} = α_{i} + j β_{i}

| β_{1} | \leq | β_{2} | \leq | β_{3} | \dots \leq | β_{n + 1} |

3. A Proof of the RH

This section is planned to present a proof of the Riemann Hypothesis. We first prove that Statement 2 of the RH is true, and then by Lemma 2, Statement 1 of the RH is also true. To be brief, to prove the Riemann Hypothesis, it suffices to show that

α_{i} = \frac{1}{2}, i = 1, 2, 3, \dots

in the new expression of

ξ (s)

as shown in Eq. (30).

Proof of the RH: The details are delivered in three steps as follows.

Step 1: It is well-known that all the zeros of

ξ (s)

always come in complex conjugate pairs. Then by pairing

ρ_{i} = α_{i} + j β_{i}

and

{\bar{ρ}}_{i} = α_{i} - j β_{i}

in the Hadamard product as shown in Eq.(10), we have

\begin{matrix} ξ (s) & = ξ (0) \prod_{ρ} (1 - \frac{s}{ρ}) \\ = ξ (0) \prod_{i = 1}^{\infty} (1 - \frac{s}{ρ_{i}}) (1 - \frac{s}{{\bar{ρ}}_{i}}) \\ = ξ (0) \prod_{i = 1}^{\infty} (1 - \frac{s}{α_{i} + j β_{i}}) (1 - \frac{s}{α_{i} - j β_{i}}) \\ = ξ (0) \prod_{i = 1}^{\infty} (\frac{β_{i}^{2}}{α_{i}^{2} + β_{i}^{2}} + \frac{{(s - α_{i})}^{2}}{α_{i}^{2} + β_{i}^{2}}) \end{matrix}

(30)

where

ξ (0) = \frac{1}{2}, 0 < α_{i} < 1, β_{i} \neq 0

The absolute convergence of the infinite product in Eq.(30) in the form

ξ (s) = ξ (0) \prod_{i = 1}^{\infty} (1 - \frac{s}{ρ_{i}}) (1 - \frac{s}{{\bar{ρ}}_{i}}) = ξ (0) \prod_{i = 1}^{\infty} (1 - \frac{s (2 α_{i} - s)}{| ρ_{i} |^{2}})

(31)

depends on the convergence of infinite series

\sum_{i = 1}^{\infty} \frac{1}{| ρ_{i} |^{2}}

, or equivalently,

\sum_{ρ} \frac{1}{{| ρ |}^{2}}

, which is an obvious fact according to Theorem 2 in Section 2, Chapter IV of Ref.[23], as shown in the following.

Theorem 2.^[23] The function

ξ (s)

is an entire function of order one that has infinitely many zeros

ρ_{n}

such that

0 \leq Re ρ_{n} \leq 1

. The series

\sum | ρ_{n} |^{- 1}

diverges, but the series

\sum | ρ_{n} |^{- 1 - ε}

converges for any

ε > 0

. The zeros of

ξ (s)

are the nontrivial zeros of

ζ (s)

Remark: In the Theorem 2 of Ref.[23],

Re (\cdot)

is identical to

ℜ (\cdot)

in this paper, both

Re (\cdot)

and

ℜ (\cdot)

mean the real part of any complex number.

Further, considering the absolute convergence of

ξ (s) = ξ (0) \prod_{i = 1}^{\infty} (1 - \frac{s (2 α_{i} - s)}{| ρ_{i} |^{2}}) = ξ (0) \prod_{i = 1}^{\infty} (\frac{β_{i}^{2}}{α_{i}^{2} + β_{i}^{2}} + \frac{{(s - α_{i})}^{2}}{α_{i}^{2} + β_{i}^{2}})

(32)

we have the following new expression of

ξ (s)

by putting all the

ρ_{i}

related multiple factors (zeros) together in the above Eq.(32)

ξ (s) = ξ (0) \prod_{i = 1}^{\infty} (\frac{β_{i}^{2}}{α_{i}^{2} + β_{i}^{2}} + \frac{{(s - α_{i})}^{2}}{α_{i}^{2} + β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}}

(33)

where

d_{i} \geq 1

are the real multiplicities of

ρ_{i}

, i are natural numbers from 1 to infinity.

Step 2: Replacing s with

1 - s

in Eq.(33), we obtain the infinite product expression of

ξ (1 - s)

, i.e.,

ξ (1 - s) = ξ (0) \prod_{i = 1}^{\infty} {(\frac{β_{i}^{2}}{α_{i}^{2} + β_{i}^{2}} + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{i})}^{2}}{α_{i}^{2} + β_{i}^{2}})}^{d_{i}}

(34)

Remark: According to the new expressions of

ξ (s) / ξ (1 - s)

, i.e., Eq.(33) and Eq.(34), we conclude that all

ρ_{i}

and

1 - ρ_{i}

related multiple zeros, i.e.,

{(α_{i} \pm j β_{i})}^{d_{i}} / {(1 - α_{i} \pm j β_{i})}^{d_{i}}

are included in the

i^{t h}

group of factors,

(1 + \frac{{(s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}} / (1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}}

, respectively, or in another word, before or after the

i^{t h}

group of factors of

ξ (s) / ξ (1 - s)

, there are no

ρ_{i}

and

1 - ρ_{i}

related multiple zeros.

Actually, with such arrangement of $ρ_{i}$ and $1 - ρ_{i}$ related multiple factors of $ξ (s) / ξ (1 - s)$ , we "assigned" a reason for excluding, in the proofs of Lemma 3, Lemma 5, and Lemma 6, the "abnormal" situation, i.e., the successor factor and its predecessor factor represent the same quadruplet of zeros.

Step 3: According to the functional equation

ξ (s) = ξ (1 - s)

, and considering Eq.(33) and Eq.(34), we have

ξ (0) \prod_{i = 1}^{\infty} {(\frac{β_{i}^{2}}{α_{i}^{2} + β_{i}^{2}} + \frac{{(s - α_{i})}^{2}}{α_{i}^{2} + β_{i}^{2}})}^{d_{i}} = ξ (0) \prod_{i = 1}^{\infty} {(\frac{β_{i}^{2}}{α_{i}^{2} + β_{i}^{2}} + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{i})}^{2}}{α_{i}^{2} + β_{i}^{2}})}^{d_{i}}

(35)

which is equivalent to

\prod_{i = 1}^{\infty} {(1 + \frac{{(s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})}^{d_{i}} = \prod_{i = 1}^{\infty} {(1 + \frac{{(1 - s - α_{i})}^{2}}{β_{i}^{2}})}^{d_{i}}

(36)

And that real numbers

β_{i}

can be certainly arranged in order of increasing

| β_{i} |

, i.e.,

| β_{1} | \leq | β_{2} | \leq | β_{3} | \leq \dots

Then, according to Lemma 3, Eq.(36) is equivalent to

\{\begin{matrix} α_{i} = \frac{1}{2} \\ | β_{1} | < | β_{2} | < | β_{3} | < \dots \\ i = 1, 2, 3, \dots, \infty \end{matrix}

Thus, we conclude that all the zeros of the completed zeta function

ξ (s)

have real part equal to

\frac{1}{2}

, i.e., Statement 2 of the RH is true. According to Lemma 2, Statement 1 of the RH is also true, i.e., all the non-trivial zeros of the Riemann zeta function

ζ (s)

have real part equal to

\frac{1}{2}

That completes the proof of the RH.

Remark: According to Lemma 1, there are 2 pairs of complex zeros of

ζ (s)

simultaneously, i.e.,

ρ = α + j β, \bar{ρ} = α - j β, 1 - ρ = 1 - α - j β, 1 - \bar{ρ} = 1 - α + j β

. With the proof of the RH, these 2 pairs of zeros are actually only one pair, because

ρ = 1 - \bar{ρ} = \frac{1}{2} + j β, \bar{ρ} = 1 - ρ = \frac{1}{2} - j β

. Thus Lemma 1 could be modified more precisely as follows.

Lemma 1*: Non-trivial zeroes of

ζ (s)

, noted as

ρ = α + j β

, have the following properties

1): The number of non-trivial zeroes is infinity;
2): $β \neq 0$ ;
3): $0 < α < 1$ ;
4): $ρ = 1 - \bar{ρ}, \bar{ρ} = 1 - ρ$ are all non-trivial zeroes.

4. Conclusion

This paper presents a proof of the RH based on a new expression of

ξ (s)

, i.e.,

ξ (s) = ξ (0) \prod_{i = 1}^{\infty} (\frac{β_{i}^{2}}{α_{i}^{2} + β_{i}^{2}} + \frac{{(s - α_{i})}^{2}}{α_{i}^{2} + β_{i}^{2}})^{d_{i}}

where

ξ (0) = \frac{1}{2}, ρ_{i} = α_{i} + j β_{i}

and

{\bar{ρ}}_{i} = α_{i} - j β_{i}

are the complex conjugate zeros of

ξ (s)

0 < α_{i} < 1

and

β_{i} \neq 0

are real numbers,

d_{i} \geq 1

are the real multiplicities of

ρ_{i}

β_{i}

are in order of increasing

| β_{i} |

, i.e.,

| β_{1} | \leq | β_{2} | \leq | β_{3} | \leq \dots

i = 1, 2, 3, \dots, \infty

The proof is conducted according to Transfinite Induction, and the key-point is the use of "real multiplicities" of the zeros of

ξ (s)

. Obviously, the real multiplicity of a zero of

ξ (s)

is an objective existence, unique, and unchangeable. As a result, the functional equation

ξ (s) = ξ (1 - s)

finally leads to

\{\begin{matrix} α_{i} = \frac{1}{2} \\ | β_{1} | < | β_{2} | < | β_{3} | < \dots \\ i = 1, 2, 3, \dots, \infty \end{matrix}

Data Availability Statement

My manuscript has no associated data.

Acknowledgments

The author would like to gratefully acknowledge the help received from Prof. Tianguang Chu (Peking University), Prof. Guangda Hu (Shanghai University), Prof. Jiwei Liu (University of Science and Technology Beijing) while preparing this article.

The earlier versions of this manuscript have been uploaded on the web site of Preprints: https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202108.0146/v25.

References

Riemann B. (1859), Über die Anzahl der Primzahlen unter einer gegebenen Grösse. Monatsberichte der Deutschen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, 2: 671-680.
Bombieri E. (2000), Problems of the millennium: The Riemann Hypothesis, CLAY.
Peter Sarnak (2004), Problems of the Millennium: The Riemann Hypothesis, CLAY.
Hadamard J. (1896), Sur la distribution des zeros de la fonction ζ(s) et ses conseequences arithmetiques, Bulletin de la Societe Mathematique de France, 14: 199-220, Reprinted in (Borwein et al. 2008). [CrossRef]
de la Vallee-Poussin Ch. J. (1896), Recherches analytiques sur la theorie des nombers premiers, Ann. Soc. Sci. Bruxelles, 20: 183-256.
Hardy G. H. (1914), Sur les Zeros de la Fonction ζ(s) de Riemann, C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, 158: 1012-1014, JFM 45.0716.04 Reprinted in (Borwein et al. 2008).
Hardy G. H., Littlewood J. E. (1921), The zeros of Riemann’s zeta-function on the critical line, Math. Z., 10 (3-4): 283-317. [CrossRef]
Tom M. Apostol (1998), Introduction to Analytic Number Theory, New York: Springer. [CrossRef]
C. D. Pan, C. B. Pan (2016), Basic Analytic Number Theory (in Chinese), 2nd Edition, Harbin Institute of Technology Press.
Reyes E. O. (2004), The Riemann zeta function, Master Thesis of California State University, San Bernardino, Theses Digitization Project. 2648. https: //scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu /etd-project/2648.
A. Selberg (1942), On the zeros of the zeta-function of Riemann, Der Kong. Norske Vidensk. Selsk. Forhand. 15: 59-62; also, Collected Papers, Springer- Verlag, Berlin - Heidelberg - New York 1989, Vol. I, 156-159.
N. Levinson (1974), More than one-third of the zeros of the Riemann zeta function are on σ= $\frac{1}{2}$ , Adv. Math. 13: 383-436. [CrossRef]
S. Lou and Q. Yao (1981), A lower bound for zeros of Riemann’s zeta function on the line σ= $\frac{1}{2}$ Acta Mathematica Sinica (in chinese), 24: 390-400.
J. B. Conrey (1989), More than two fifths of the zeros of the Riemann zeta function are on the critical line, J. reine angew. Math. 399: 1-26.
H. M. Bui, J. B. Conrey and M. P. Young (2011), More than 41% of the zeros of the zeta function are on the critical line, http://arxiv.org/abs/1002.4127v2. [CrossRef]
Feng S. (2012), Zeros of the Riemann zeta function on the critical line, Journal of Number Theory, 132(4): 511-542. [CrossRef]
Wu X. (2019), The twisted mean square and critical zeros of Dirichlet L-functions. Mathematische Zeitschrift, 293: 825-865. [CrossRef]
Siegel, C. L. (1932), Über Riemanns Nachlaß zur analytischen Zahlentheorie, Quellen Studien zur Geschichte der Math. Astron. Und Phys. Abt. B: Studien 2: 45-80, Reprinted in Gesammelte Abhandlungen, Vol. 1. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1966.
Gram, J. P. (1903), Note sur les zéros de la fonction ζ(s) de Riemann, Acta Mathematica, 27: 289-304. [CrossRef]
Titchmarsh E. C. (1935), The Zeros of the Riemann Zeta-Function, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, The Royal Society, 151 (873): 234-255. [CrossRef]
Titchmarsh E. C. (1936), The Zeros of the Riemann Zeta-Function, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, The Royal Society, 157 (891): 261-263. [CrossRef]
Hadamard J. (1893), Étude sur les propriétés des fonctions entières et en particulier d’une fonction considérée par Riemann. Journal de mathématiques pures et appliquées, 9: 171-216.
Karatsuba A. A., Nathanson M. B. (1993), Basic Analytic Number Theory, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.

MDPI Initiatives

Important Links

Choose an area of interest and we will send you notifications of new preprints at your preferred frequency.

Disclaimer

A Proof Of The Riemann Hypothesis Based On A New Expression Of The Completed Zeta Function

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Lemmas

3. A Proof of the RH

4. Conclusion

Data Availability Statement

Acknowledgments

References

MDPI Initiatives

Important Links

Subscribe