Can someone comment Nash's words about zeroes of Euler - Riemann zeta function ζ(s) that its zeroes are singularities of space and time. This one is of course from Howard's film Beautiful Mind. XJam [2002.03.24] 0 Sunday (0)
Sorry to be so dumb, but I never understood how -2, -4 etc can be zeroes of the function. Why isn't zeta(-2) just the sum of squares 1+4+9+... ?
[2002.08.28] Stuart Presnell
Because obviously that would not work ! zeta(s) is defined using (sum 1/z^s) over all complex numbers s=x+iy with x > 1, then extended to the whole complex plane (excepted at -1) using analytic continuation. That is, zeta is the unique analytic function (= holomorphic function) on the complex plane (less -1) that matches the sum where it is defined. That is described in the first paragraph of the article on the Riemann zeta function. See also "analytic continuation". -- FvdP Sep 5 & 7, 2002
Ah, thanks! I was relying on the little knowledge I had gleaned from a few popularisations - didn't know about the 'analytic continuation' aspect of it. If only I had bothered to read the appropriate Wikipedia entry... [2002.09.13] Stuart
All Wikipedia text
is available under the
terms of the GNU Free Documentation License
Search Encyclopedia
Search over one million articles, find something about almost anything!
... book.
Translations appeared in Italian (Venice, 1488,
Milan 1489), Spanish (Seville, 1536), Arabic (Rome,
1663), Armenian (Rome, 1674), Hebrew (Frankfort,
1837), ...