[math-fun] Simple statement equivalent to the Riemann Hypothesis
The Riemann Hypothesis, often declared to be the number one outstanding unsolved question in mathematics, usually takes some explaining to describe accurately to a layperson. I like the equivalence, recently proved by Jeffrey Lagarias of AT&T Research, of the Riemann Hypothesis to the following Statement: Statement: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ For any n = 1,2,3,... let sigma(n) = the sum-of-divisors function (so that for example sigma(6) = 12), and let H_n = 1 + 1/2 + 1/3 + ... + 1/n be the nth harmonic number. Let log denote log_e. Then for all n = 1,2,3,..., (*) sigma(n) <= H_n + exp(H_n) * log(H_n) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------. Lagarias adds the words "with equality only for n = 1". I suspect it's easy to prove that for n > 1 the RHS of (*) is never an integer, but maybe a number theorist out there can confirm this. --Dan A.
This is a note about a result from Xavier Gourdon : http://numbers.computation.free.fr/Constants/Algorithms/nthdigit.html see the bottom of the page. He has found a way to exploit the Newton-Leibniz series for Pi : (arctan(1) = 1 - 1/3 + 1/5 - 1/7...) and make a relatively efficient algorithm to compute Pi in BASE 10 at the n'th position. The efficiency of the alogrithm is sub-quadratic. He could reach the position 4,000,000 in 2 days of computation on a PIII with a very small amount of memory. This result is interesting since it opens the door (if well implemented) to distributed computing of Pi over the internet and many users. The result is somewhat based on my previous results on pi in base 10 and also Bellard improvement. http://www.lacim.uqam.ca/%7Eplouffe/Simon/articlepi.html in 1996 I had found a way in O(n*n*n), Bellard improved the result and made a better program in O(n*n) and now we have something better, that's neat. This is remarkable that the more we find efficient algorithms for Pi the simpler are the formulas to get the digits. Simon Plouffe
participants (2)
-
asimovd@aol.com -
Simon Plouffe