Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Author
Title
Accession No.
4#3
<fy
-^ete.-^""^
This book
.fl
G. H.
HABDY,
M.A., P.B.S.
E.
CUNNINGHAM,
M.A.
No. 26
Madras
Toronto
Macmillan
Tokyo
TTTnTTMAftSH. M.A.
University of Liverpool
CAMBRIDGE
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS
1930
PREFACE
a Cambridge SOME
of Riemann.
years ago Prof. H. Bohr and Prof. J. E. Littlewood began to write tract on prime-number theory and the zeta-function
script of considerable size which still exists. The fact that it is now somewhat out-of-date is due in no small part to the subsequent researches of Bohr and Littlewood themselves.
of the zeta-function
itself, without regard to its applications in the theory of numbers. These applications will form the subject of a companion volume by
Mr A. E. Ingham. No attempt is made to explain the connection between the two subjects. We give only a brief sketch of the better-known properties of the function, which the reader will probably have learnt
elsewhere. Apart from this the work is complete in itself. The early part of Chapter IV is taken from the Bohr-Littlewood
MS.
In several places I have made use of Prof. lecture notes, which he has kindly placed at my disposal.
B. Jeffery for reading
the manuscript, and Miss M. L. Cartwright and Prof. Gr. H. Hardy for reading the proof-sheets. A large number of corrections and suggestions are due to them.
E. C. T.
LIVERPOOL
May, 1930
'
Introduction
CHAP.
I
.......
of f (s)
.
CONTENTS
PAGE
1
II
Mean
The
value theorems
III
....
.
. .
29
43
63
76
IV
The
($)
V
VI
Appendix
Bibliography
..... ......
. .
93
98
99
INTRODUCTION
This tract
is
intended for readers who already have some knowledge its rdle in the analytical theory of numbers ;
its
elementary
The function
(1)
is
(*)=
=
<r
n=
2 *-,
l
where
for <r>
it,
and the
series is convergent,
analytic,
1.
W = n(ip
-P -)-
(<r>i),
where p runs through all prime numbers. If we expand each factor in 8 powers of p~ and multiply formally, the result follows from the fact that each integer n can be expressed as a product of prime powers p m in just one way. The rigorous proof is easily constructed by taking first
a
finite
(2)
we deduce
that
(s)
has no
We
(2')
p
,9
m
5 A(n) | logj>_ 2 ~mr~~ n=l ~ir~ /i m = j>
'
^
where
N )
'(*)_
*
p
Y77\~~ 4
(n}
W
^
= log^?,
if
is
jt?,
and otherwise
A (n) =
and Aj
= A (n)/log n. (w)
of the function
A third representation
For
w- 8 T
(5)
a?--
e~
nx
dx,
to
and we obtain the result on summing with respect the order of summation and integration.
n and inverting
INTRODUCTION
We
(4)
C starts
the origin once in the positive direction (but excludes the points 2^7r, 4eV, ...) and returns to its starting point. The numerator of
is
2)},
where the
is
is real
axis.
This formula
deduced
by shrinking the contour G into the real axis described twice, and taking account of the different value of the logarithm on the two parts.
from (3) in the case
>
any finite region, and an integral function of s. This enables us to continue (s) over the whole plane. Hence (s) is regular for all values of s except for a simple pole at s = 1, with residue 1. For the poles of T (1 s) are at 5=1, 2, ... and we already know that (s) is regular at all these points
this integral is uniformly convergent in
Now
so represents
except =
8
1.
Also, if s
is
^ __ = -3 + ^ ___/, __+...,
!
1
73
T)
**
we
(s)
-J,
(-2)=0,
position
Cn
in
which
it
includes
2eV,
. .
of the residues
<
Cn
(1
(s}
= 2V-
sin |
l
STT
(1
- s)
s)
or
(6
f (1
- 5) - 2
(*).
This holds (by continuation) for all values of s. We deduce from this that C (5) has no zeros in the half-plane o- < except at s - - 2, - 4, ....
For alternative proofs see Handbuch,i, 281-299, Hardy (2), (3), Mordell (1), (2). is used throughout as an abbreviation of E. Landau's Handbuch der Lehre von der Verteilung der Primzahlen, 1909. The numbers in brackets refer to the
*
Handbuch
INTEODUCTION
Writing
(7)
(*)
M*-i)^** r tt*),
<() = *(!-). is an even function of z.
or
(5)?
Also
(J
order* of
o-
H (z\
By
(6")
it is
sufficient to con-
^ |. Now we
>
for
o-
8 (0
<3<
>
1),
|
1,
(
00 =
(^- s ) +
(*#-) =
follows from (7) that (s) is of order 1 at most. By considering real positive values of s it is easily seen that the order is exactly 1. It follows that U(fjz} is an integral function of order J, and, so has
an
infinity of zeros.
From
strip
this
we deduce that
o-
(s)
has an infinity of
1.
(5).
For by Hadamard's
Here
(0)
(11)
= -(0) = J, and 6 =i
Euler's constant.
where y
is
The proof
(12)
*
of (11)
is
rather complicated.
In the
first
place
we have
s{<W-.-ziH-
See G. Valiron's Lectures on the General Theory of Integral Functions, 1923, Oh. n, 5. f Throughout the tract A denotes a positive absolute constant, not necessarily the same at each occurrence. For each n, A n always denotes the same constant.
for
A(d) denotes a constant depending on 5. f(t)0 {0 (t)} t>A. f(t) = to{\f/(t)} means that |/(t) \>A \f/ (t)
\
<f>
(t)
large
values of
or ^ depends on 5, the constant implied in t. If, however, always denotes an arbitrarily small positive number. J See Yaliron's Integral Functions, Ch. in, 4.
is A(8).
4
For by
(8)
INTRODUCTION
f
u-[u~\, 8+l uirr~^
,
( v
cr> 1N l)'
please,
We
can choose
last
term
is
as small as
we
and at the same time so that the first term differs from y by as little as we please, and this independently of <r. Having fixed N, the remaining
terms tend to zero with
This proves (12).
logarithmically,
We
can
now
'
calculate
(0)
by
differentiating (6)
making
obtain
$-*-0,
and using
(5),
r'(l)
= -y.
We
(13)
(0)
= -Jlog2*r.
= Finally b, f (0)/ (0), and (11) follows from (13). As to the zeros of (s), it is known that there are none on the line
<r
1.
We
deduce from
(2')
that
cos
Since
(15)
3
+ 4 cos
<
cos 2<
= 2(1+ cos
<^>)
^ 0,
every term in the exponent on the right of (14) is positive, and hence the feft-hand side is not less than 1. Putting cr=l + e(6<l), and
noting that
(16)
(l
c)
r u^-'du^l + i < ?
w we obtain
.
Since f (s)
-* 0,
if 1
is
infinity.
+ it were a zero of f (s). But the right-hand Hence (s) cannot have a zero on 0-= 1. The number* (T) of zeros of f (s) between t = and
T is given
This number
is
(s)
r
as for
(s),
and
is
half the
number
<
2,
-~T<t<T.
(2), (3).
INTRODUCTION
Hence,
real for t
if
T is
am
variation of
and also for <r = | so that the variation round the whole four times the variation round a quarter of it (starting from rectangle = A am (s), where A denotes the variation from ,9 = 2). Hence irN(T)
0,
,
(s)
not the ordinate of a zero, knN(T) is equal to the round the perimeter of this rectangle. Now (s) is
is
2 to 2
+ iTj and thence to \ + iT, along straight lines. Expressing (s) and using the asymptotic formula* for r ($), we
(s)
(log T).
R(2 + '*)l71
2 w" >0.
=2
Hence the
interval
variation of
if
am
(s)
from 2 to 2 +
iT is
less
than
TT.
+ iT and J + iT,
this
or {($)} ^ 0. Hence in each part the variation of ain(s) does not exceed TT, and consequently A am (.9) (q + f ) TT.
\ \
R {($)} ~
f 5T)}
Now
I (z)
is
0,
J
|
^
^
R (^) =
2
|
(s
is
f'7
{ (*
for
2,
.
and
so ^
71,
where ^
the
number
of zeros
off (z)
in
^f
By
Jensen's theorem f
log |/(2
+ r^) dO |
27T
log i/(2)
and by
An
(19)
N(T+
for/ (z).
1)
- N(T) -
(log
T ).
This however follows directly from Jensen's theorem in the same way
as the above result
We
(20)
*
am
(s)
(log*)
>
(cr
|).
(ed. 4, 1927),
Whittaker and Watson, Modern Analysis f Valiron's Integral Functions, Ch. in, 1.
$ Handbuch, 337.
13-6.
CHAPTER
I
(*)
1.0. INTRODUCTION. The fundamental problem which emerges from the attempt to determine the distribution of the prime numbers is where are the zeros of the zeta- function ? We also encounter the problem
:
of the asymptotic behaviour of (s), as t -*- GO, for given values of o-. The two problems are closely connected, and we cannot entirely separate
it
first
chapter are
place
12,
on the
zeros,
which
falls into
naturally here. take a certain value (or range of values) of <r, and ask, how large and how small are its smallest values? are the largest values of (,$) |,
We
Actually we always put the second question in the form, how large are the largest values of 1/ (s) ? More precisely, we seek to determine
1 \
monotonic functions
<
() and ^
(t)
such that
00 =
{*(*)},
00 =
a WOK
(t),
the problem
takes the form of determining the best possible values of the constants.
1.1.
'
l-.ll.
THEOREM
1.
ff<r>l, then
|COOIr
for all values of t, while
|()|2(1
for some indefinitely large values of t.
We have*
So the whole
1.12.
00 =
I
^~
8
1
- Sw- = t (<0-
difficulty lies in
We
Nreal numbers a
T,
r^t^rq
and
integers
>
N
,
in the range
&N such
t
that
(
\ta n -xn
*
\^llq
1, 2,
)
...N}.
unless otherwise stated.
The
limits of
(1, oo
extensively by Dirichlet. This argument, in its simplest form, is that, + 1 points in there are regions, there must be at least one region
thus the cube into qN equal compartments. Consider the qN +l points, in the cube, congruent (mod 1) to the points (ua iy ua 2) ... where
u - 0,
T,
.,
N At least two of these points must lie in the same comrq If these two points correspond to u = u lt (%<^2)>
.
ua^
uu^
We
now apply
(s)-
this to
(s).
For
all
values of
N
less
2 n-*e- ttl(* n +
n=l
first
nr*-
than
its real
(1)
|(*)|
n=l
2
n=JV+l
n~*.
By Dirichlet's theorem
i>
there
a number
^,
(
-->
N such
>
N and
jvr
t (T
^ t ^ rqN \ and
integers
|dogw/27r-^|<l/g
Hence
iV
1, 2, ...2V).
cos
and so
oo
n=l
w=l
(1)
JV+1
and hence by
Now
/"oo
2 w~
N+I
<r
I
.
JN
o-
Hence
(4)
and the
1.14.
result follows
if
q and
A consequence of
or
Theorem
that
(5),
= CTO >
1, is
This follows at once from the fact that the upper bound (0-) of (*) tends to infinity as <r-^l. But a little additional argument gives the
following
more
precise
result*.
THEOKEM 2. However large region <r > 1, t > t0) fo9* which
(1)
|
may
be,
(s)|>
1.13.
log log*.
(3)
Take T=
(2)
and g =
6 in
Then, by 1.13
and
(4),
K(
between
S )|2M|-2^-}/(<r-l)
for a value of t
and 6^.
We
choose
above S 1 ^- 1 *. Then
<>
for a value of t
such that
(4)
N>Alogt.
The required inequality (1) follows from (3) and (4). It remains only to observe that the value of t in question must be greater than any
assigned (3) that
that f (s)
1.15.
t
,
if
or- 1
is
>
1,
There remains the question as to how large the constant A of It has been proved that Theorem 2 is true if A has e y where y is Euler's constant^. This particular
,
n(i-l), p<#\ P/
log
a?"
1.16. It is plain that the above argument may be applied to all Dirichlet series, with coefficients of fixed sign, which are not absolutely
series for
and its differential coefficients are of this type. The result log(s) is however a corollary of that for (s), which gives at once
I
for
log
(s)
>
|
A
For the nth differential
for
indefinitely large values of t in <r> coefficient of log (5) the result is that
*
some
(4).
for
some
in o->l.
1.21.
We
now turn
3.
THEOREM
If
a-
>
then
_!__
/br S0?w0 indefinitely large values of t. As before, the first part is almost immediate.
-
We
have
/ \
00
where
if
A*(l)
l,
/*
() = (-!)*
p.
is
(n}
= 0. Hence
1.22.
are not
We
part.
In this problem
/x. (n) give any therefore leave Diophantine approximation for the moment, and adopt a different method* (which may also be used to prove Theorem 1). It depends on the fact that, if <f> () is positive and
Dirichlet's
theorem
all
of one sign.
We
continuous for a
^ t~b
lim
then
1 {<t>(t)}
n-^ooLi-aya
("j-i- I
l'
dt]
We can
= Max
a function
1.23.
series.
Iff(s) - 2a nn~*
is absolutely
convergent for
a = <TO
then,
for
<r
<
(7).
10
We have
|
/(<TO
if)
2
I
2 **- **
m = n are
omitted.
Hence
double series converges uniformly with respect to J since the absolute value of its general term is not greater than a m a n (mn)-"*', and each term tends to zero as T-*- oo Hence the sum of the series
The
last
1.24.
We
3.
We write
and then
as the product of
N+
8
of every term a m m~ s being prime to the 'n' of any non-zero a n n~ in seen from this and the theorem of 1.23 that
thus express {(s)}~ 1 absolutely convergent Dirichlet series, the 'm* with non-zero coefficient in any one of them
power.
Mi
We
fc
any
other. It is easily
M{\t-*(,)\}=
nl
Now
for every
is
and
N
since the Dirichlet series for
*
i;
v '
IJ
*~~
(s)
begins with
....
Hence
M
Now
2&^
5&"|
J^
Km
Hence
-l
|l-^"
lim [M{\
fc-.oo
^
~ 2k
l'
=
2k
Max
>
(s)
}]
n
W=l
(1
+^-
ff
).
Since this
is
true for
all
values of
,
by
a
A;
its
limit as
N-*~
QO
viz.
(cr)/
such that
11
for
which
is
t>tQ >0.
<r
There is another proof of this result, depending on Diophantine approximation. We have already noticed that Dirichlet's theorem is not available in this case; but there is another theorem rather like it
which we can
1.26.
dent,
use.
KRONECKER'S THEOREM!. If a lt a^ ...a are linearly indepenN and hi, &2 b are any real numbers, then, given q, we can find a N
,
number
and
integers
x^ #a
...
XN such
(w
that
\dnt~ b n
If all the
-xn \<\lq
= l,
2,
...N).
numbers b n are zero, the result is included in Dirichlet's theorem. The general theorem requires that the numbers a n should be linearly independent, i.e. that there should be no relation of the form
... are integers. Also it assigns no upper bound for the such as the qN of Dirichlet's theorem. The consequence of this is that from Kronecker's theorem we can deduce only unboundness, and not a definite order-result such as Theorem 2.
,
where r lt r2
t
number
= Sjr +
p
*(*),
where
<
(s) is
bounded
(t
for
a-
>
1.
Now
< S
COS
%>-
= S COS
\0gpn)p n
- ff
Also the numbers log p n are linearly independent. For it follows from the theorem, that an integer can be expressed as a product of prime
factors in one
way
and therefore no
*
+ rN logp N = 0.
(7).
t Various proofs of Kronecker's theorem are known. See, e.g., F. Lettenmeyer, JProc. London Math. Soc. (2), 21 (1922), 306-314; H.Bohr, ibid. 315-316. We give Bohr's proof in an appendix.
12
($)
Hence also the numbers log jt?n/27r are linearly independent. It follows therefore from Kronecker's theorem that we can find a number t and
integers
x ly
...
X N such that
\tlogp n
TT
or
%Trtcn
<\TT
(n=
1, 2, ...,
N).
Hence,
COS (t logpn)
=-
COS (# log p n
~TT-
2iran )
oo
< - COS
\ir
--
and hence
R (3 /?-)<P
1
#r 71=1
+
7l
2
= N-hl
^ n -'.
Since S^"" is divergent, we can, if ~ choose a- so near to 1 that 2/?w a > H. JVso large that
is
Then
B
P
Since
may
be as large as we please,
it
follows that
R(2^~
p
),
and
N roughly, less than an upper bound not very different from q discovery enables us to prove a result analogous to Theorem 2.
THEOREM
region
a-
1.28. We have already remarked that in the general case of Kronecker's theorem we can assign no upper bound to the number t but* Bohr and Landau * have proved the remarkable result that, in the particular case where a n = logp n/2v a value of t can be found which is,
;
t
.
This
5.
>
1, t
tQ
may
be,
of
s in the
1.3.
The function
have
(1
if).
1.31.
THEOREM
6.
We
(0 +
uniformly in any region
(tog
In particular
*
(6), (7).
($)
13
t,
N=
[t],
=
=
(log
N) +
(1/0 +
(log
0+0(1)
+ 0(1).
This result will be replaced later by a slightly better one (Theorem 11) which, however, requires a far more difficult proof.
1.32.
THEOREM
7*.
(!
+ &) = Q
(log,log*).
already seen that (s) takes arbitrarily large values in the immediate neighbourhood of the line o- = 1, but our argument by itself
We have
does not tell us anything about the values on the line cr= 1. There is however a well-known theorem, due to Lindelof, which enables us to
deal with questions of precisely this kind.
the form
is
regular
and of
0(t
half-strip
cr^or^o-2,
>0;
Then
and
\f(s)
that
|
M throughout
;
\f(s)\^M
-Suppose now that the function (1 it) were bounded; we know that + it) is bounded and we know from Theorem 6 that (s) = (t A ) in (2
the half-strip
1^0-^2,
t^t
-(s)
>0.
half-strip,
We
that
(1
it) is
We
2,
concerning the asymptotic behaviour of (5) in <r> 1, to obtain correspondingly more precise information concerning its behaviour on the
line
*
cr
= 1.
(1).
A proof
of this
is
given by
Hardy and
Series, p. 15.
14
In the
first
is
in the half-strip,
,
CTj^ (7^(T2
tt
= = if f(s)-*-0 on both the lines (r a-l9 o- (r2 as t~*-<x>, then in the half-strip. f(s)-*-Q uniformly The deduction, while easy, is not completely trivial. We consider the
and
,
function
choosing h sufficiently large we can ensure that F(s) < on the boundary, and so, by the main theorem, also throughout the half-strip.
By
Hence
|/GO| = 1(1+ hjs} F(s) <2c > h, which gives the desired result. for s Now we see from Theorem 2 that
|
| \
< o- < 2
as
-* co
and/(2 + it} -*
0.
/(I +
if)
and
this proves
Theorem
7.
By using the
result
mentioned in
mil
1.15
we can prove
further that
fi5<(i*^ ,=.&.
i i
log log
is
Theorem
of course
11
does
lie
towards narrowing the gap. The real truth may anywhere in the gap. But we shall see later that the
little
O-result
probably (i.e. if the Biemann hypothesis is true) the best and that it is the 0-result which falls short of the truth. A similar possible, remark applies to all our 0- and O-results. We are always more successful
is
This
is
all large
perhaps not surprising, since an 0-result is values of t, an O-result about some in-
1.4.
The zeros of
(s)
and
the function l/
(1
+ if).
(.9)
!/(! + if) we have to prove that has no zeros in the immediate neighbourhood of the line <r = 1. For purpose we use the following lemmas*.
1.41.
this
Landau
(9),
15
is
regular,
and
\f('
s
- $ 6 r,
1
then
*-p
p
rws
The function g
zero for \s-s<>\
=/(s)
H (s - p)|
is
regular for s
|
*-P
This inequality therefore holds inside the circle also.
is
zero at 5
=s
>
and
is
regular for
s
|
s
\
^ Jr, and
= A(* )
-R{h(s}}<M.
and
so, for
|-So|
I
*'()!
|
=
2
|
_
C
.
(-*)'
This gives the
result.
where
C' is
the circle
-s = |r
LEMMA. fff(s) satisfies the condition of the previous lemma, and has no zeros in the right half of the circle \s-s ^r, then
\
zero p between s
-|r
and
then
gives
M
and, since
R {l/(s
-p)}
8.
for every p,
1.42. THEOREM
There is a constant
A% such that
(s) is
* See Landau's Darstellung und Begrundung einiger neuerer Ergebnisse der Funktionentheorie, 1916, 24.
16
duction.
This depends on an inequality of the same type as (14) of the IntroBy (2") of the Introduction
Hence
{3
p,m
0,
the expression in the bracket being never negative. Let ft + iy be a zero of (s) for which, say, ft > f If there are no such zeros, the result, of course, follows at once.
.
is a constant to be determined later. We apply the last lemma to/(s) = (s) and the circles with centres o- + ^'y, CT O + 2^V and radius J Neither of these circles has any zeros in its right
.
half,
least
one zero in
is
large
enough.
Now
so that,
by
^logy<^ ^
10
(y>y
),
in
|
*- s
1
Hence, taking r = J
M= log
y,
in the lemma,
we have
Also, as
o-
~*-
1,
so that, for
y>yi,
4<r,-r
We
and the
which emerges
from
Hence
(1) gives
17
- ft, we
obtain
is
positive if
is
1.43.
THEOREM
9*.
There
is
a region
I-AI
in which
we have uniformly
In particular
6.
Naturally
it is
more
difficult to
prove
6, since it depends in the first place on the fact that 1/f (s) is regular in the region considered. shall deduce it from the
than Theorem
We
following lemmat.
1.44. LEMMA.
1.41,
first
lemma of
and
let
* Q for
\s
sQ
\<r,
cr
>
CTO
- 2r',
We
= 0. Then
Q,
give
(3)
\*llp\<AMIr.
|
Now
1
^ - R (p) > 2/ ^
i
2 s
|
for
s
|
<
\
r'.
1
-i
r
ri
r
<
1
~Ri
r~r
IP!
s-p
and
so
ipi
= -B(-),
-p
so that,
^-R2
AM
by
(3),
The
result
*
now
lemma
of
1.41.
f
Gronwall
Landau
(12).
Landau
(12).
18
1.45.
Theorem
9.
We know
-f
that
<r
(s) is
not zero
).
in a region o-^
eV
where
> 3,
-s
&
\ belongs to
2,
n(n)
= 2 4; <
<e
log
Hence
A ' logt
.
(2)
Also
(3)
no
A,
(s)
CT O
A Jog
t<>.
For
t<>>
circle
where
We
= 34 2/8
log
tQ ,
M= Max
~~
4)
log
We
deduce that
8 log
4 log
This
is
+ i4 2 /log t^a-^2
(3).
1
Again, for
lo S
o-
/S log
t,
TTT^T
"" ]
log log
u4.
Hence
while for
TT"\
1
'
lo-
<
+ ^At/log t
o-
(1).
s)
19
j-^.
^ = O (log log
t).
is
Theorem
from Theorem
1.5.
2.
(s)
functional equation obtained in the Introduction enables from those we have us to deduce the results for the half-plane o- < obtained in the half-plane o- > 1. It gives, for o- fixed and t > 0,
1.51.
The
(1)
=*-
For example, we deduce from Theorem 6 that (it) = (tf* log tf). The remaining results may be left to the reader. It is plain that we can obtain no result of the kind considered for < o- < 1. For, on any line o- = <TO (0 < <TO < 1), 1/f (s) in the critical strip for all we know, become infinite an infinity of times. We !/($) may,
therefore confine our attention to
(s).
1.52.
We
now introduce
;
a function
/x (o-)
/u,
+ *) as a function of t more (or numbers A such that (<r + i) = It follows from Theorem 1 that functional equation that ^ (o-) = |
(9) of the Introduction that
/*
precisely,
(*).
/u
(V)
=
<r
for
o-
>
1,
o-
for
<
0.
Further,
follows from
(o-) is finite
for
^ oit is
<
1.
of
/* (o-) is
that
convex downwards.
a direct consequence of Lindelof s theorem, and is discussed in It tells us a good deal about detail by Hardy and Riesz. (or) in
/x,
<
L,
In the first place, we must have ^ (o-) ^ would cease to be convex somewhere between \ and > < o- < J. o- for \ (o-)
/u-
it
Similarly
< o- < 1 for the property of convexity shews Again, /* (o-) -^ J |cr for that /A (o-) does not rise above the straight line joining the point (0, ), which gives its value for <r = 0, to (1, 0), which gives its value for <r = 1.
;
We
for
strip.
/>t(o-);
but
its
exact value
we can obtain a slightly smaller upper bound is not known anywhere in the critical
critical strip.
1.53. The above argument shews that () = (*-**+') in the We can however obtain a slightly more precise result.
20
THEOREM
t(s)
o-
(t*~
**
log
*)
uniformly in
0^
1.
In particular
We use the more general form* of Lindelof s theorem, which states that,
iff(s)
is
regular
A
(t
\for
o-
o- 2
and
/(cr, + &)
<
(*),
then
tion
<r2
<r <r linear func2j k (o-) fem0r {t } uniformly for of cr which assumes the values ki,fc2 for o- = c^ o-2 Now f(s) = (s)/logs satisfies the conditions (for t> 1) with = 0, = J, ^2 = 0. The result follows at once from this. = 1,
k((r)
,
.
f (s} =
/fci
1.6.
the theorems
of
1.61.
We
possible to improve on
the 0-result of the foregoing work, of the method used. The analysis
and we
here.
shall
now
give an account
The
analysis
is
based on some very important inequalities, due to inequalities satisfied by sums of the form
tf-'sVn r=0
where ^
If
is
we
and (r) is a polynomial in r with real coefficients. each term in 8 by its modulus, we obtain \8\ ^p*. But it replace easily seen that, in simple cases, more than this is true. Thus if
is large,
P (r) = ar,
and
so
then
|
S|
=
|
(1
- ^)/(l - <F)
< Min(^,
|
cosec \a
|$|
,
cosec \o\).
2 IfP(r)=ar then
a
|/g|
= #/8= S *%
q=Q
r =0
(**~ r *)=
*%
2 eian(2r+n)^
/x,
n=-ij,+l r
last
sum
r runs through
- n consecutive
|
\
Hence
W
We
*
e*
ian
Min
(/A,
cosec
na |).
Hardy and
Weyl
(1),
Littlewood
(2),
Landau
(10).
21
for the
is
to obtain
an inequality
sum
N'
which
is clearly connected with the zeta-function. into partial sums, each containing /x terms. first of these, for example, is
S up
n=N
Now
+
(1
"AT ) -tV/
~ ex P ^ ^
i
n= i
J\
~\7i r
)
= exP
i^S n-l)
(
exp
-u
I
n=k+l)
where
and
(r) is a polynomial of degree k, and with which we can easily deal. Hence
^ (#)
is
a function of
v, k,
JL\/
V= Q
r =0
Here the inner sum is, apart from the factor rv of the form S, and we can obtain an inequality for it from that for S by partial summation. This establishes the connection between S and S'. The actual result * is as follows. Let and N' be positive integers such that ^ N' < 22V; let > 3, and A" = 2*- Then
,
N
(
k-1
(1)
r'-i
n=N
Nt
k +v
log
N} log*
t.
to suit
The inequality contains the arbitrary integer k, which may be chosen any particular case under consideration.
from (1) the following inequalities t
i
:
We deduce
(2)
<^
\<A
(A
(3)
(4)
^N
*
t2 ,
(1)
f ,
in which, as in (1),
110, (16).
N" ^
2 AT,
state (3) and (4) with upper limit pp. 114-115. this being all that is required in the method followed here.
We
instead
22
1.62.
We
THEOREM
(1)
We have
(s )
4 *1
I*
<r
-W*
t]
<
(l+<
Min
so that 6
[log{l/(l -<r)}/log
for
o-
2,
log log
*],
^ log
log
> A. Since
- 2~ r >
1
>
1/J?,
we can apply
1.61 (4),
19,
with x
t,
Suppose
first
that
1
- <r
t.
Then
it is
t>A,
t.
n- =
tf-'n-^t**
t/log
t,
then
for #
log
J log
_^
>
^4
and
which
is
This proves
(1),
and
(2) follows
by continuity.
* It is convenient at this point to anticipate the result of Theorem 19. It does not seem appropriate to set it out in full in the middle of a sketch of this kind, and in any case the results could be obtained without it. A similar remark applies a little later to the use of Theorem 22.
(1),
Weyl
(1).
(s)
($)
=1=
23
THEOREM
13.
<r
There
1
is
a constant
suck that
t>t<>.
Ofor
>
(log log
t
/log
t,
t>A,
< (.) = *W
fexp J4 log F L I
{exp
(A
log log
f)
t}
^
(log
#).
The proof now depends on the same ideas as the proof of Theorem but we use the additional fact that (1) holds for
and not merely
(as
8,
before) for
o-
^
ft
I/log
t.
Let
(y
>
3).
iy,
if
which
ft
> o-o - \
>
for
any other zeros certainly satisfy the required conditions. For SQ-O-Q+ iy, and also for s = o- Q + Viy, the circle ^ r = (log log y) 2/log y s -s
| 1
lies in
if
the region
o-
is sufficiently large.
^1Now
(log log
/log
^>,
A
o-o-l
__
A log y
log logy'
and
it
and
(2)
1.41,
_ TO
+
1
2ty)
Also 1.42
(1) that
15
5i
log logy
4 o-o-l
Solving for
1
- /3 we
obtain
which
is
positive if
is sufficiently
small.
24
1.64. Apart from the extension of 1.63 (1) to the wider range, the is the same as in the proof that t. It seems clear that until we discover some for o- ^ 1 (s) 4= /log
new
far
cr
analytical method, we cannot hope to extend the result very at most not beyond the immediate neighbourhood of the line
15
4crc -l
We obtain 1_ + 5AJogM
~~r
<r
~P
'
(CTO
1) log
Jf <!/*<!,
y,
<r
and
so, since
log
is
must be small;
our result
is
- /3
is
small,
1.
i.e.
1.65.
THEOREM
1
There
is
a region
-A
t^o-^2,
t>t0)
in which
we have unifwmly
L
ro)
In particular
_n "
MO*
\
'
00 ~ -
n u
=
t(l+it)
Thefproof
is
\\oglogtj'
(ll-it)
\loglogtJ
similar to that of
Theorem
.
9.
Let
(log log t^*
13.
Then, by 1.63
(1), for s
|
s
\
o-
'
<T O
____ = -1
log*
log log
#
25
and
,
tQ
Theorem
9.
As a final application of the method, we extend our 0-result to values of o- not covered by Theorem 12, and in fact obtain (s) a more precise result for certain values of cr, but riot one which holds
1.66.
for
uniformly as
<r~*- 1.
THEOREM
(1)
15.
2,
Q = W~\
<r
In particular
(2)
We
inequalities*:
1(
(3)
(4)
_i
/
2
^/log*1
n-'=0 (*<"+)
(?
>
2,
o-
t/Q).
^^
^>
2.
Suppose
first
that
-+0(l),
and dividing the sum into the parts (3) and (4), we obtain the result. The case q 2 is more difficult, and we have to appeal to some such result as Theorem 22. Theorem 22 gives, for example,
n< J(t/2 and the result
f
ir )
where x =
sums.
(1)
y - ft (<r) of 1.52 must pass. We now see that j* ()<, and that the graph touches the line y = at or = 1 The actual value of p (cr) in the critical strip remains unknown. But we shall see later that there is some reason to suppose that /* (cr) =
of the function
.
for |
^ cr si
1,
equation) for
See Landau
(10), p. 118.
26
1.7.
Van
inequality 1.66 (2) for (J + it\ deep as it is, is not the best that is known. method similar in principle to that of Weyl, but still more complicated, has been invented by van der Corput, primarily for appli-
The
and similar problems in the theory of numbers. It has been shewn by Walfisz that van der Corput's method
cation to the divisor problem
gives the following result:
THEOREM
announced!.
16.
it)
= 0(t
9Ts
).
Still further
method have
also
been
1.8.
^-results for
(s)
(<r
1.81.
<, or
<
unbounded for every o- in unbounded applies equally But we can prove more than this.
is
o-
+ i) + it)
THEOREM
17}.
For
(o-
<
1,
1
it)
= O {exp
-a~e
}.
(log
t)
however (<r + it) takes values greater than any power of log large; but we cannot prove that it takes values as great as a power of t, however small. We shall not give the proof, which is somewhat complicated; but we shall refer to it again at the end of Chapter II, where it is really more
|
Thus
in place.
1.82.
values of
states a
It
sometimes
The above theorem tells us that in the critical strip (s) is large. But it tells us nothing about the distribution of the
t
may
however another result which many more values of t. be expressed roughly by saying that \(s)\ is, in general, not
for
which
it is large.
There
is
states it for
very small.
for
-l<r<2,
r-i^f
t
of measure \jH.
See Walfisz
(1).
t See a footnote on page 400 of Math. Zeitschrift, 29 (1928). Valiron (1), Landau (5) and (14), Hoheisel(l). J Titchmarsh (4).
(s)
is
27
We first prove
/3
often useful.
LEMMA. tfp =
V ' (1)
+ iy runs through
77T- *
0)
l-y|<l*-P
= 0(logO ^ * '
Then
uniformly for
o-
2.
1.41.
M= A log
^
for
1
(2)
5 - So ^ 4, and
|
?$00
in
P -*
by (19) of the Introduction, the number of terms in one of the above sums but not in the other is (log ), and each such term is
Finally,
0(1).
1.84.
We have,
for
-l^o-^2,
T-$t
^
T+ J,
+ b ^ $= 2 W ir-yi<i*-p 0(logn
since the
(log
7 ),
in this sum, but not in that of the and each such term is (1). Hence
=
(1)
It is easily seen
2
IT-yl
>
S
IT-yKl
log|*-y|+0(lo g
r).
\og\t-y\dt,
i
considered as a function of
y, is
it is it
then
equal to
that
log 2
1.
T)
follows
2
Hence
(2)
log|*-y|>-4J5riogZ;
except in a set of measure 1/5", and the result follows from (1) and (2). The exceptional values of t are, of course, those in the neighbourhood
of ordinates of zeros of
(s).
28
1.85. Application to a formula of Ramanujan*. Let a and ft be real numbers such that a/3 = w, and consider the integral
^(the two forms are equivalent on account of the functional equation). To obtain a suitable set of values through which we can make T -* <x> it is most convenient to use, not Theorem 18 itself, but 1.84 (1). Suppose that t -*-o> through values
&T,
,
-1
J. 9 y/log y) for
Then
for
t<t
where
It
A IQ < %TT if A B is small enough, and t large enough. now follows from the asymptotic formula for the F-function
|
that the
7
integral along the horizontal side of the contour tends to zero as T -*- QO - > exp through values s uch that y (- Q y/log y) for every y. Hence
ro
-*(.$
-i
JL
AJ
A(^-
S).j
The
n
first
term on the
left is
equal to
r
2^-i~too
s= _ 2/
=s
and, evaluating the second term in the same way, and multiplying through by x/a we obtain Ramaiiujan's result
>
-,,-, .
have, of course, not proved that the series on the right is convergent in the ordinary sense. have merely proved that it is convergent if the terms are bracketed in such a way that two terms for which
We
We
Of course the
zeros are,
on the
much farther apart than this, and it is quite possible that the may converge without any bracketing. But we are unable to prove
Hardy and Littlewood (2), pp. 156-159. t In forming the series of residues we have supposed for simplicity that the
poles are all simple.
29
CHAPTEE
II
as T-*- oo
for
<r.
We also
consider
mean
values of
(,?) |.
The
results give
I, and indeed might be used to prove 0-results if we could push them far enough. Apart from this they have applications to the problem of the zeros, and also to problems in the theory of numbers*. For cr> 1 we deduce at once, from the general mean value theorem of
1.23, that
Km
2'-*. oo
J.
(a-
+ it}
2
|
dt =
S n-** = t (2o-).
first require.
Jl
shall shew that this is also true for | r < 1. But we an approximate formula for (s) in the critical strip.
We
2.12. THEOREM 19 1.
(1)
We
have
l
s 00 = 2 n- -x n < x
-8
l(l-s) +
0(x-\
a- ^ o- > 0, \t\< 2?r#/c, where c > 1. suppose without loss of generality that x is half an odd integer, since the last term in the sum (which might be affected by the s). restriction) is 0(x~*\ and so is the possible variation in x ~*l(l
uniformly for
We may
Suppose
first
that cr>
1.
Then a simple
i
(*)i
z~ cot *z dz
~
rx
rx
+ i<x>
(2)
*
=--.
**Jx
iaQ
(cot
-*)*-&--. *JX
and
(4).
(4).
(3)
In
(3) quite
30
formula holds, by the theory of analytic continuation, for all since the last two integrals are uniformly convergent in any finite region. In the second integral we put z = x + ir, so that
values of
cot
irz
The
i\
Jo
2?r
~
I
<
t
I
IX
follows.
2.13.
LEMMA.
for |
o- < ^ or <r < 1. 1, and uniformly for Let Si denote the sum of the terms for which m <
|??, 2> 2
the remainder.
In
2 2 we
write
mn
(w
r where
9
^ |^, and
r/ri)
then
(1
>
r/n.
Hence
T in
22 <
J.
2 2
tj,=lr=l
- r)- a w"
J?i
2<r
w/r < J.
2 ^w=l
r=l
T.
2.14.
We
THEOREM
20.
As T -+
\
oo
(a-
+ ^) >
2
|
*~ T
(2cr)
o-
(o-
>
|).
>
1,
so that
,
we now suppose
1.
Since
1,
Theorem
19,
with
x=
gives
say.
Now
Jl Jl
m<t
ff
n<t
rT
= 2
m<Tn<T
n<T
2 m- njTj
(n/mY
dt
(T^
ff
= Max (m,
= 2 n-**(T-ri)+0{ =
m<n<T
+
(T
22
m~ a n72
/logn/m}
n-* +
(T
72
-2
*)
-^
log T)
31
= 1, we can replace or, in the 0-term, by f say, provided that cr < 1. If oand obtain the same result. Hence, in any case,
o (log
n
which holds
and the
2.15.
result follows.
It will be useful later to
strip.
have a result of
this type
uniformly in the
It is
THEOREM 21*
uniformly for |
^ o- ^
that J
2.
Suppose
first
^ ^
o-
|.
Then we
T
have, as before,
Jl
n<
uniformly in
o-.
Now
S w- 2 '^ 2
?i<
2'
n
2(T
<T
/
w-^^logl
u~ 2a du <
7
,
/oo
and
also
2 w~ < n<T
2
---T
.
/j
Jl
""-i
7
Similarly
T - * log
2
and
also,
putting
x = (2cr
2 - 2*
7 ^ Tlog T, T,
1) log
9
)
T
before.
f the term
,
(f
= o" ^ 2, we
obtain
whence the
2.16.
result.
The
particular case
cr
=J
is
Littlewood
(4).
32
We
can improve the 0-result to an asymptotic equality. But Theofor this purpose, and we require a deeper result
The weakness
term
Theorem 19
lies,
0(x~\ which is small enough for most purposes, but in the fact that x is greater than a certain multiple of t. Thus the finite sum by which we represent (s) contains more than At terms. We shall now obtain a formula, which is more complicated than 2.12 (1), but in which
much smaller number of terms. The restriction on x arises from the inequality which we obtain for the 2.12 (2). Now we can modify the argument applied, e.g., integrals in
the finite sums contain a
to the second of these integrals,
(1)
by writing
ix~
r e -*W-wl*dr\ =
o
...
\t\jx)
l2(+l)ir}
and
this is
(2)
(x~
if
i.e.
for
We have
rx
/
now
to
Now
e*** (-*>
rioo
rx
I
^rte z
-s
dz =l
JO
Jx
Jo
= (2-)*-
r (1 - s) -
JQ
Dealing with the other integral in the same way, we obtain altogether
(3)
2s
^- sini$7rr(l-s) S v v = 1
1
8- 1
- S
v
JO
The first sum is precisely the beginning of the series for (s), valid for < 0, which we deduce from the functional equation. It is therefore cr suggested that we can obtain a more useful approximation to f (5) in the critical strip by taking a number of terms of the series valid for cr < 0, as well as terms from the series valid for o-> 1. The result, known as
1
is
as follows
(5 )
THEOREM
22.
2'w*""
sin
7rsr(l -5),
and
n<y
g k, x > k, y > k.
(3), (4)
and
(6).
33
(,)
=
|
g)} (M)*",
is
give the proof of the case where or has a fixed value between In view of our previous remarks it is only a question of dealing with the second sum in (3). suppose first that x is half an odd in-
We
and
1.
teger,
which occurs in
take the number n Then y < n y + 1, and condition (2) is satisfied. We suppose also that t > 0. In the first n 2 terms of the sum in question we replace the integral along (0, x) by integrals along (0, ix) and (- ia, x). In the first part we have z~ a = \z\~ e~* nt and these terms are
so that
We x~
,J (\t\l2-ri).
[y~\
We
(1), (2),
and
(3) to be
1.
{V \v=l
8
(
JO
e^ Xn e-^ r-^
t
In the second
we have z=x-
refc
and
\z-
=
1
- xrj2 +
r 2 )~* a exp
(- 1 arc tan X A \
i\J
- O {x-" exp
since
arc tan
= (- tr/xj2)} - )} ^ {(/(I =
^f^
(
1).
Also
a #
Y^^~
Jo
The terms involving e~* veiri may be dealt with in the same way. The terms v n 1, v n require special consideration. The former gives a
term
(e~
Ai
)
X**
L
Since (^
1)
Jo
exp F
arc tan
this is
(
T^ ^V^-r
+ v - 1) w^/^ (n J v
[-
dr
TT ^ T/TT = J#/^?,
x~ L
Jo
exp
arc tan
x^j^-r
H~
7-
-7^-- r \
dr
>J%x
= "*
-^4.
%
~\
(^0
c = l y,
{r
x\
x iJ2
*
yo
(r Ar%tlx dr \
J
(V-*
*).
34
For the term
v
x + i<*> ),
(|
t |*~
0(atT'
Since
2/&7T
-* n *r+t&Tct*nr/x
fa}
>
I
2#7r
= t\x>
this is
L-'
e -trl*+t*tr/x
dr
= Q /-
e -Atr*/x*
fa \
= Q (%1-a r
This gives the desired result, under the restrictions stated. We have finally to remove the restrictions (i) x = \ (mod 1),
Firstly let
(ii)
Then
Hence
-x 2 = x S
whence the theorem follows for any x. To remove the second restriction, take the result with
change
s into 1
s.
x^y, and
We
<
a;
obtain
Hence, dividing by
w<l/
xi,
8
|xi|
UK"*, we obtain
1
{(*)= 2 ^- + x 2
which
is
n'^+Ofo-O + Ofc'-
!*!*-'),
^ and y interchanged. This completes the modifications shew that the result holds for o- = 1 also. proof. Slight As an example of the superiority of Theorem 22 over Theorem 19,
the theorem with
notice that
we can deduce at once from Theorem 22, on = V = (*/2 7r)* o- = \ and observing that x (I + it) = (1), that
9
taking
We
take
o-
= J,
>
*
2,
and
a?
#/(27r /v/log
tf),
y=
^/log
#.
(2)
and
(4).
35
= 2
n<,r
+
+
2 n<#
-*)
o (r*) + o (log-to
(log**)*
= 2
w<.r
say.
fir*
(log*0
= Z+
Since
it is,
as in the proof of
Theorem
( Jo
19, sufficient to
prove that
T
2 \Z\ dt = (
Now
JO
JO
m<x
membered that x
In inverting the order of integration and summation, it must be reis a function of t. The term in (m, n) occurs if
(m,
ri)
=7
7 1
T^m, 22
n).
Hence, writing
X= T/{27r x/(log I
r
)},
\Z\*dt=
m,n<xjTi
^m-^
n m n<X*
t
n<X
The
first
term
is
Tlog X+
(T) =
T log T+ o (Tlog T
).
is
o(
and, by the
n<X
of
2.13, the last
lemma
term
is
2.23. The investigation of mean value formulae of this kind has been carried a good deal further by Littlewood and Ingham*. It is known that if a and ft are fixed, <*>, /?> J, a+^>l, then
T.
Littlewood
(2),
Ingham
(1).
36
This formula has been proved with a comparatively small error- term, and, with necessary modifications of the expression on the right, extended to all (even complex) values of a and ft. In particular
-2y)r+0(rtlo g
where y
is
Euler's constant.
2.31*. In view of the difficulty of proving the approximate functional equation, it is of some interest to have an independent proof of theorems
of the type of
Theorem 23. The formal basis of this method is a wellknown formula in the theory of Fourier integrals. We may write Fourier's
reciprocal formulae in the form
ft \
r*
(1)
(x(x)
/\
respect to
by (x) and integrate with (inverting the order of the integrations on the right), we
obtain formally
(2)
y-oo
We
(-
In the cases which we actually use, this process is easily justified. may, assume that both F(x) and G(x) are analytic functions,
oo
oo
regular
,
and bounded on the real axis, and absolutely integrable over The inversion of the order of the integrations is then ).
justified
by the absolute convergence of the associated double integral. A cr > 0, except (t } for Suppose now that /(a) = S a n n~* is regular and = 1, and that the series is absolutely convergent possibly for a pole at s forer>l. Then, ifR(a?)>0,
/2+ioo
-= 2
oo
/-2+ioo
r*fM-&=
1).
oo
2 ae~*.
Now move
at
the contour to
<r
- a (0 <
<
Let JR
(si)
be the residue
5 = 1. Then
n=l
say.
|TT),
we obtain
<
r T (a + ii)f(a +
it)
*
l e~ Q"-*) a+ *)
e-W dt -
Titchmarsh
(1).
37
(iet-*\
G (0 = (2*)-* r (a +
8
*)/(a
4-
i~ AT
J -ao
^-^** J-oo f
Jo
Since
(a
+ ^)~<r*i'i
,
|tf|-*
^TT)
tegral over (- oo
0)
is
2
i
bounded
j
2 *- 1
as |*| as 8 - 0,
oo,
and we obtain
r
Jo
/(a + if)
^
o,
dt =
r
Jo
We
take/(s)
(*),
|, in 2.31 (4).
Then
1
--'yo
The ^-integrand is bounded over (0, TT) uniformly in 8, so that this part of the integral is bounded. In the remaining part we express the squared modulus as a product of conjugates, and obtain
w
( g)
r
Jv
**
{exp(iw )-l}{exp(-fwe)-l}
term becomes
(4)
2l7T
--
^ = i^-
tS
/"*
+
Jo
The
series is the
important part.
__
I
exp (- iue)
u}
u2
'
(TT,
IT
ice
),
a process which
is
easily justified.
The
ofe
[exp
- v) ei8 } \(iir
It is
1]
i8
'
1]
asymptotic to
^,=1
'
The
result is equivalent to
Theorem 23
to the properties of
152.
38
Also
exp
__ _ _
l
I exp (2mr sin 28) 1 - exp (4W sin2 8) {exp (2mr sin 28) - 1}" 2 ~= 2 0(w- )+ 2 OOr 2W7rsin25 ) = (log 1/8) + 0(1/8) = 0(1/8).
1 |
n^l/5
w>l/6
(2ra7r
sin 28)
-1
exp
(2u-rr
1
sin 28)
-1
2s
-l
'
(f
*>
/0
log 8
We have We have
still
and
(4).
|exp {(-
v) e
i8 }
1
1
exp (v cos
4-
?r
sin 8)
- 1,
\
n/f-
dv
is
__
TT
Uo e^l> oosl +
sin 8)
_ l-Wr
is
~U
1/
(Jw Sin5
^ -l)~ u V
^\-nf]
'
8/
1 1>-4; for this is plainly true when 8 = 0, and so by continuity for < v < TT and 8 small enough; and if V>TT the modulus of the exponential term is less than 1. So we find in the same way that the last term in (4) is (log 1/8). This completes the
Also |exp{(^7r-<y)0~ }-
proof.
(5)
involving the square, but they are distinctly more difficult to prove.
The
The formulae
oo,
and higher powers will appear more also have applications in the theory
of numbers.
THEOREM
(i)
If cr> 1
24*.
As T-*
we have
d (n)
we deduce
at
was summed by Ramanujant. If the expression of n m p^i p r r, then d (n) = (m l +1) ... (m r + 1). It is easily seen from this that we have the identity
The
last series
in prime factors is
2 d2 (n) n~* =
*
U 2
p
m=0
f
(m +
1)
^'.
(2),
(4).
Ramanujan
B. M. Wilson
(1).
39
it
follows that
(2)
S d2 (n) n- = n
p
(1
- p~**}
(1
- p-J = (* (*)/
(2s).
2.42. The general case may be deduced from the approximate functional equation. take x-y> and follow a method analogous to shall however give a different proof, due the proof of Theorem 20.
We
We
to
Carlson*, which
is
equation.
We
start
(1)
2 d (n) n- s e~ 8n =
f^"" T(w-s)
O) &- w dw,
w 2 obtained by inserting the series ^d(n)n~ for (V) and integrating = a, where a- - 1 < a < o-, we the contour to term-by-term. Moving (w)
2 = pass the pole of T (w 5) at w s, with residue C 2 C (w} at w - 1, with a residue of the form
(s),
AT (I -s)% 8
A S*-
If
S>
\t\~
A
,
this is
(2)
?(s}= S
*&
-**
Let us
proof of
call
the
first
Z and Z^.
l
Then, as in the
Theorem
iz.1- dt
20,
=o
w
).
*-
+ o
since t
d (n) =
(w
Also, putting
w = a + iv,
|
r (;-
Now
it
follows from the asymptotic formula for r(#) that the first
is
integral
(1),
e
while
r-2T
/-OQ
U-oo
Carlson
J2T
\\T(w-8)?(w)\<fa=0(e~
)
AT
)
for
|#|<y,
since
*
(3).
(a,
+iv) = 0(\v\
A
).
t Handbuch,
60.
40
Hence
J-2T
J -2T
wnere X
(cr) is
of 2.41 (l)is
0(T). Hence
4
T
(3)
f
\t (*)
*=
7*<*>
T)
8 2<x
j^r
Choosing S so that
is
(T}
7
,
if
...
<r
J 7", | T
we see that the right-hand side of (2) > 1 - (1 - a)/X (a). For such values of cr, replacing T by and adding, we obtain
,
~2
of positive
numbers
cr
for
which
(4) holds.
csl-(l-)/X()
range
(0, c).
But, taking
a-
-c
in 1.51 (1),
we
see that
'
A(l-c)^4e-2 + A(c) = 4c-l. Since X (1 - c) ^ 1, it follows that c ^ J. Also, putting (5), we obtain c ^ 1 c/(4c 1), whence
*
c in
(2c-l) ^0,
= J.
cr
>
As
function,
we
argument has no special connection with the zetamust refer the reader to Carlson's paper for the proof.
for
cr
is
THEOREM
25.
As T
-*- GO
In this case even the approximate functional equation merely gives 7 T ), and a further argument is required. Two proofs of the
*
Carlson
(2).
41
2.31, 2.32;
known*.
We may
:
or
we
(s),
may
use an approximate functional equation for the square of which runs as follows t
THEOREM
26.
#" - 1 ^
o-
^ f x>A,y>A, xy = (t/2rr^
,
then
2.51. now pass to still higher powers of f (s). In the general case our knowledge is very incomplete, and we can state a mean value formula in a certain restricted range of values of <r only. The two
following theorems include all that
is
We
known on
this point.
THEOREM
(1)
27.
For
&>2,
r\t(<r + ti)\dt~T2df(n)n-*'
for <r>
1/&,
dk (n) being
the
product of k factors.
This may be proved by a straightforward extension of Carlson's method, or by means of the approximate functional equation. We leave
the proof to the reader.
THEOREM
28.
fft(k +
it)
0*
+e
)>
<r>(4*X + l)/(4AX+2).
We
2.42 (2):
(2)
*(*)= S
n=l
1
'- M
dw +
Taking a = | we obtain
*
(3)
(*)
24 (n) n- <r
fin
(8"**
^ + ')
fc
).
Now,
as in
r2T
2.42,
JT
is
2<r negligible if 8
~ 2 - 2e
T.
t Hardy and Littlewood
Ingham
(1),
Titchmarsh
(1).
(6).
42
then o (1)
if
4/fcX
The
2.52. If we use Theorem 15, so that we may take X = ^, we obtain a more extended range from Theorem 28 than from Theorem 27 if k > 6. Theorem 16 would of course extend the range still further. It is quite = (), in which case we can put X- 0, and the possible that f ( + if)
result holds for
for every k. In the present state of knowledge we cannot extend the range of validity of 2.51 (1) to o- > i for any value of k greater than 2. Nor is any mean value formula for
<r
> J,
known
for k
>
2.
2.53.
On
we
bound
for the
mean value
Jo
THEOREM 29
where CK depends on k
Putting
in
only,
2.31 (4),
we
obtain
Jo
r U (i
7?
(it) is
(ri)
(1),
where
the residue term. The integral on the right falls into two For u > 1 the term (u) is trivial be omitted; and we can approximate to the integral over
find that this part is greater than a integrating term-by-term. 2 constant multiple of (1/8) log* (1/8). On the other hand it is, for k> 2, very difficult to prove anything about the integral over (0, 1); its very
We
existence depends on some sort of cancelling between the large parts of the series and of the residue term. But the integrand is positive, and
so, in
Titchmarsh
(4).
43
Theorem
an argument of the same kind which enables us to prove 17. It follows at once from Theorem 29 that
for every
k a function of
directly,
and we may expect to obtain a still better result by making S. Actually we apply the argument, not to ( + it) but to (<r + ii) with o->|, and then deduce the case <r = f
k
;
CHAPTER
3.1.
III
The paper in which Riemann first considered the zeta-function has become famous for the number of ideas it contains which have since proved fruitful, and it is by no means certain that its riches are even now exhausted. The analysis which precedes his observations on the
3.11.
zeros is particularly interesting.
(1)
He
w8 " fl!
writes
n =1
5-
=^(^),
and
obtains,
(2)
by term -by-term
r (is)
7T-**
f "V (x)
J
o
aF- 1 dx.
{2iA (1 AT)
is
1 },
we
equal to
9 -**
><far+4 ( (x^
Jo
- ap-*) dx
Ji
=
S -(~T)
r
i
Putting s= | +
it,
and writing f
H(0 = *00 =
we obtain the formula
(4)
*
H(0 = i-(^ +
vi, ex. 17.
.
Whittaker and Watson, Modern Analysis, (ed. 4, 1927), Ch. f Following Landau, we use SI where Kiemann uses
44
If
by
parts
4t//(l)
we obtain
.
S (*) = 4
a?) efo.
Riemann then observes, 'Diese Function ist fiir alle endlichen Werthe t endlich, und lasst sich nach Potenzen von tt in eine sehr schnell convergirende Reihe entwickeln. Da fiir einen Werth von s, dessen = - S log (1 -p~ 8} endlich reeller Bestandtheil grosser als 1 ist, log (s) und von den Logarithmen der iibrigen Factoren von E (t) dasselbe bleibt, gilt, so kann die Function S (t) nur verschwinden, wenn der imaginare Theil von t zwischen ^i und - \i liegt. Die Anzahl der Wurzeln von E (t) = 0, deren reeller Theil zwischen und T liegt, ist etwa
von
T
27T
Icier 10g
T T - -27T
27T'
denn dass Integral / d log E() positive um den Inbegriff der Werthe von t erstreckt, deren imaginare Theil zwischen \i und - \i, und deren
reeller Theil
zwischen
und T
-~,
gleich (
T log in der
TJ i
multiplicirt mit
Man
findet
dieser Grenzen,
sind.'
nun und
That etwa
so viel reelle
all the zeros of E() are real, is the famous 'Riemann hypothesis', which remains unproved to this day. The memoir goes on 'Hiervon ware allerdings ein strenger Beweis zu wiinschen; ich habe indess die Aufsuchung desselben nach einigen fliichtigen vergeblichen Versuchen vorlaufig bei Seite gelassen, da er fiir den nachsten Zweck meiner Untersuchung [i.e. the explicit formula for ?r (^)] entbehr-
lich schien.'
for the number of zeros of E (t) with real 7 and I has of course been proved since Riemann's time; and something too has been discovered about the real zeros. But one would like to know what Riemann meant by saying that 'we find about as many real zeros as there are zeros altogether.' There seems to be no
part between
clue to the exact significance of this remark. Riemann apparently never returned to the subject, and it was 34 years before the researches of
an
* It is usually supposed that this 1/T is a mistake for log T; for, since (T) has infinity of discontinuities at least equal to 1, the remainder cannot tend to zero.
45
to
3.12. The formula 3.11 (5) is interesting because Riemann seems to have attached considerable importance to it, though he made no definite use of it, except to obtain his rapidly convergent series/ It
'
is
only recently that P<51ya* has used it to prove that E() has an a result which had been obtained some time
before in another
features.
way
(see
it
3.3).
We
can write
in the form
$(u)
where
This
u-*is
cos Zutdu,
3>(u)
= 4. S (2rcW w -;
n-\
is
As
$ (u) ~ 167T
=2
cosh 9^0~
If
side
by
3! (u) cos
t,
Jo
then
Bi()
still
is
an
integral function of
4>
all
is
(u) given by -* c 8h4u $2 (u) = (167T cosh 9^ 24?r cosh bu) e and this also leads to a function H2 (^), all of whose zeros are realj. It is also possible to deduce from the formula necessary and suf,
closer approximation to
that
00
00
x and
y.
a2
a3 = 25'01...,
a6
a5 = 32-93...
37*58...
1 1
and
They are all real. It was shewn by Backhand that the < t < 200 contains 79 real zeros, and that these are the only interval < < 200 and Hutchinson U has verified the reality of zeros with (f)
so on.
R
||
P61ya
(3).
t P61ya
(1), (2).
(1), (2).
P%a (3).
IF
See P61ya
(1).
(3),
7.
Backlund
Hutchinson
46
= 300. Naturally the further we go the more the calculations become. "We shall content ourselves with complicated shewing that the first zero, at any rate, is real, and finding its position
the roots as far as
very roughly.
calculations.
We
some quite
trivial
numerical
3.2.
THEOREM
30.
/?
+ iy(y>0) of
t
(s)
which
is
between
= 10 and
18.
<y
T.
We
=10, t=18, and then that Hence ^(10) = 0, ^(18)= 1. There ^V(10)<landthatO<^(18)<2. is therefore just one zero between t - 10 and t= 18 and it must lie on o- = since zeros not on a- = J occur in symmetrical pairs. J, It follows from 2.12 that, if x is half an odd integer, and er ^ then
; ,
\)
where
/-\
/ \ vv ~
rt
M % n
-sJ
n<x
-r o,
Putting
10,
real part,
we obtain
2)
R
where, as
is
+ 100 =
from
8',
easily seen
>
R
1
(2) (replacing
(<r
+ 100 >
for
8'
| |
<
1.
Also
(<r
+ 100 * 0.
f,
we obtain
ri)
R
where
|
|
(0-
+ 180 =
8",
8" < 1. Also cos (18 log w) is positive + 180 > for o- > J, and (a- + 180 * 0. (<r
for
n-
2, 3, 4.
Hence
Now
(3)
TtN(T) - A {am
5 (s
1)
*-**?
2
(|s)
(5)},
where
that
2,
+ iT, J + /T7
8
It is easily seen
A am s (s -
1)
= ?r,
A am
?r-*
= - ^T log
TT.
arctanfw/^)
(ed. 4, 1927),
12.32.
47
follows that
(4)
log
we deduce that
+
*N(T)
<
^log
(iZ* + ^)* +
TT
A am
(*).
Since
R(s) remains
2.
7"= 10 or
18,
A am
r
remains between
|TT;
^(18) <
In the problem of the lower bound we have to take into account the
integral in (4).
We
have
2uT
for
w<l, !T> 2.
Since
2wtt
-l>2irw, the
is
less
than
r
Jo
Mr
2
(JT
1)
^L = __? 2ww
7
27r
(IT
l)
2T<
JT,
we obtain
JL\j
^ - 4v + A am
7T jt
(),
lie
on
o-
J.
\,
3.31. THEOREM 31
Let
2T
(f)
= e** H (#)/(^ +
is
J)
tf,
=-
i?r-*
"* tt e**
r ( J + &)
($)
C (J
i#).
Then Z(f)
zeros.
We
<r
= ^ correspond
infinity of real
The
is
r2T
I
JT
*
Z(f)dt,
JT
\Z(i)\dt,
I |
Hardy
(1),
(1),
Landau
(3).
(4),
de la Valise Poussin
(1) (2),
(2),
Fekete
P61ya
48
as T-*- oo.
If Z(f) has only a finite number of zeros, it is ultimately of constant sign, and the second of the integrals is equal to the modulus of the first. shall see that this assumption leads to a contradiction.
We
if
We have,
1
R (#)><),
dt =
/"2-Hoo
2^-. ZTT^J
2
ti=l
sM
* 7r *
<r
<
/-2-fioo
j2-i*>
&=22
1
-*.
1
Moving the
residue
line of integration to
=
,
we pass a
pole at 5
with
*J(ir/a).
Hence
say;
or,
in terms of
Z(t\
i( J ir
is
\ where 8 is small and positive, and using the fact an even function of ^, we obtain
~8
11
cosh
{g
3) |}
-*
Z (0
rf*
=
Hence
if
2 e~** 8in 8 +
\i
/
(1)
=
\./o
4-
(1)
(3-*).
Z(t) *
for #
>
then, for
T> t
Q,
r2
'22'
JT
Z(t) dt=\
Z(f)dt <e
"
cosh
(3)
<
2e
1
-i
(Jrf
|,)
-**
Z (*) dt
On
the other
hand
so that
r
J r
* T
I
There
is
no great
difference between
and
i/;
something by this step
though we doubtless
lose
49
/2T T
p L
(J
+ t*)<fc=/
oo
1
7 ffir
t(s)ds~
2+iT
J 2-f2iT
= *- a -Tr 8
Hence
2+2iT -|2+2
n logn_l2+i
/2T
(4)
y
r
is
proved.
3.41.
We
now denote by
We have proved in
N (T) the number of zeros on 0-= with 3.31 that N (T) with I
Q
-+ oo
this.
^ (T) > A T.
based on the same ideas as the previous one, but we consider integrals of a more complicated kind. We contrast the behaviour of the integrals
/t+HZ(u)e~^
t
du,
J=
j
ft+II
t
T \Z(u)\e~* du
as
t -*~ oo
II being constant.
T
l* J T
We
(2)
\I\*dt<AHJT
development of the Fourier formulae of
2.31.
3.42.
We require a
ft+H ft
J
G(x)dx,
t
F(x)(e *-l)lix
iH
same way as
2
G (x)
f
and F(x),
a
so that
ft+H J /cooo !/
I
G(x}dx dt=
J -
Now, putting x =
Tre
^-*^
-
in 3.31 (1),
**
(
we
**^>
see that
Z(f) e-&,
are related like
V(H ^ +
$ (Tr
G (t)
(1) gives
(3).
50
(2)
i.
r*
We
equivalent to 3.11 (3), in the range (0, 1). The left-hand side of (2) is greater than that of 3.41 (2) if 8 have therefore to prove that the right-hand side of (2) is
2/T.
Now
it is less
than
Ji
T (A
J.'
we omit the
factor y~*,
and
this part is
then
simply a multiple of H.
and obtain
^ ' (3)
Atf 2
r^
Ji
/
^
2
|2|
'
^+
^1
J
Now
sum
is
0{(y8)-*},
and
its
contribution to the
fao
I
e -(m*+
Jl+UH
Turning the
line of integration
through +
TT,
and putting
#=1
we
see that this
(
1/jET+fr,
is
00
-(m+n)7rsin8/'
^-(m-n)ir rc
o8
S//2^r
= Q ^-("+ )8ln8^2
i
51
m-1
/?-(
+n)7r sin S\
2
2 S 2 0(H* w=2n=:i - m5 -n \
= 0(H* 2 m=2 \
w=2
o>
^-w^TrsinS
w-1
\
)
5
n
=im-nj
for 8
(3).
desired result for the second integral in dealt with in the same way, or, still
(2).
We next prove
that
J
/-2T
where
(2)
JT
\*\*
(4).
We
have,
if s
=|+
it,
T<t< 2T
7
,
and hence
say.
It is
now
sufficient to
prove that
2T
(3)
uniformly for
case
O^w^
7
;
and
u = 0. Now g (s)
/oo
is
regular and
J
(
),
for
or
> 0,
/o
ir+
side of (4) is greater than a constant multiple of that of (3),
of a pole which brings in
The left-hand
(s)
4-2
52
with
small
&= 0,
x and
if
8= I IT. On the right of (4), the integrand is bounded for <8< \ since, putting w=-exp (-ixe**), so that 1 -w\>A,
,
1
W_
log
ft
log 2
l-wf
/
(
1
_ w n+rj/J
^Vlogft
log
1
ft
+ 1/
<r
Also
if
1 A
-+4 22
2
1 i
ft
\
r + 1/
.
log 2
Vlogft
log
a>
/OO
7a
The
first
sum is
m-1
plainly
0-a(m+n)sin& g
_
=
2
__
sin 8
w log2
ft
log
m log
is
ft /
(me~
is
- neiB )
(1/8),
oo
_Q
^-amsinSm-l
log
2 U=3
2
w =2
_1
-
'k
j-
ft/
which
is
also
(1/3).
This proves
32.
(3).
Let
(T
27 )where|/hJ. Then
f Js
\I\dt ={ Jdt.
Js
f
I
Now
r
/-2T
fZT
\l
Js
/|/|*</ |/|*^{TJ T JT
by 3.43
(1)
\I\*dt\
)
<AH*T*
by 3.41
/r
(2); and,
and
(2),
/-2T
Jdt>T-t\ S (Aff+<i>)dt>AT-lHm(S)-T-tJ J S
\*\dt
where
m (S)
is
the measure of S.
Hence, for
H sufficiently
large,
m(S)<ATH~*.
ji> jz>
into [T/2H] pairs of abutting intervals of length H, and eachja lying immediately to the right of the corresponding^. Then either /i orja contains a zero of Z(f), unless j\ consists entirely of points of S. Suppose the latter occurs
(T,
2T)
,
for v
j\'s.
Then
53
27 ),
at least
zeros.
3.51. Theorem 32, interesting as it is, tells us nothing about the general distribution of the zeros for the total number of zeros is greater than a multiple of Tlog T. The proportion of zeros which have been proved to lie on o- = ^ is therefore infinitesimal.
;
On the other hand, if we merely ask how many of the zeros lie in the immediate neighbourhood of o- = we can say very much more. In fact we can prove, roughly, that all but an infinitesimal proportion of
,
the zeros
lie
in the
immediate neighbourhood of
a-
3.52. begin by proving a general formula concerning the zeros of an analytic function in a rectangle*. Suppose that <(s) is meromorphic in and upon the boundary of a rectangle bounded by the lines t = 0, t ~ T, cr = a, o- = /3 (/3 > a), and regular and not zero on <r = /?.
o- = j3, and here, (s) is regular in the neighbourhood of with any one value of the logarithm, we define F(s) - log <f> (s). starting For other points s of the rectangle, we define F(s) to be the value
We
<
obtained from log <f> (ft + it} by continuous variation along t = constant from /? + it to o- -f it, provided that the path does not cross a zero or pole
of
<
(s); if it does,
it
- it)}.
Let
(cr',
of poles in the part of the rectangle for which t= or t = counting one-half only. Then
T) denote the excess of the number of zeros over the number <r > or', zeros or poles on
(1)
JF(s)
ds
=-
ft
MJ
round
(<r,
T)
do-,
We may suppose
<t>
and
T to
(s)
it is
We have
(2)
J
<fo-
Jo.
fV(cr
+
I
yo
+ iT)
d<r
idt.
Littlewood
(4).
54
The
term
is
.
equal to
,
id*
/*
it)
+iT
,
(*
(*
# 00 ~-
Ja
r f$
</>00
1
*- f r +
Uo-
./IS
Jv+iT) <AO
we
obtain (1).
(s)
for
3.53. THEOREM 33*. Let N(<r', T) denote the number of zeros of 7 <r XT', 0<t< T and let -1^<TQ <1. Then
,
(1)
27T f
y<r
^(or,
T)dv= ^0 flog
U(o- +
^)|* + 0(logT).
In 3.52(1) we take a = o-, fi large and positive, and </>($) = ($), and determine / (s) = log (s) as in the case of F(s\ starting from the
real value at s
= ft. Then (on account of the pole at s = 1) = (a > = v(<T,T) N(<r,T)-% (<r<l), v(<r,T)
1).
Thus
(2)
2iri
JV(j
(o-,
T)
d<r
= - Ziri
r'
v(<r,T)
'O'O
do-
f
J<ro
f()fc-f f( J
o-o
it)idt.
JO
Making */3
(8)
-* 20
,
first
two integrals
to GO
J<r
f
(7 (o- ) is
where
a constant depending on
o-
only.
,
Using (20) of the Introduction in the range (<r 2), and the fact that Aa = (e-^ ff), for a- > 2, we see that the middle 5) = i + (<r ), am C (s) ( 7 term on the right of (3) is (log I ); and the result follows. 3.54. THEOREM 34t. For any fixed or greater than
We
have, for
or
>
|,
=i
f
,/2
Littlewood (4). f Bohr and Landau (4), Littlewood (4). J To prove the inequality, replace the integrals by finite sums of which they are the limits, and use the fact that the geometric mean does not exceed the arithmetic
mean.
55
(T
for
OTO
>
Hence,
if c^
-f
(o-
which
is
From
this theorem,
N(T)~ AT log
T,
it
follows
that all but an infinitesimal proposition of the zeros of J 8<cr<^+ $, however small 8 may be.
(s) lie
in the strip
3.55. By using Theorem 21 instead of Theorem 20 we can obtain still more precise information about the zeros in the immediate neighbourhood of <r = In fact we find at once by the above method that
.
(1)
f
J%
N(<r,
We
can now put Theorem 34 into a form which holds uniformly with
or.
respect to
THEOREM
35*.
uniformly for |
1.
For as above
and the
result follows.
is positive and increases to infinity <t> (t) infinitesimal proportion of the zeros of (s} in the
an
upper half-plane
lie
in the region
|^-||<0(01gl g^/lg^
That is to
say, the
t>A.
number of zeros outside the region and with imagin7 and Tis o (Tlog T ), enough to prove that for large T the number of zeros in
<r
the region
(1)
S1 +
</>
(0 log log
*/log
*,
* Littlewood
(4).
56
is o
7
where
The curved boundary of (1) lies ^--1 = (JT) log log 7/log
to the right of
T.
cr
= o-
But by Theorem 34
log^
and the
3.61.
case
result follows.
We now
a-.
In this
1.
we can
replace the
0(T)of Theorem 34 by
(T
9
),
where
<
We
do
this
(s) itself,
but to the
function
,*()- = *()*.().
If
a-
The
the
zeros of
(s)
>
1,
<t> z
(s)
-*- 1
as 2 -* GO
On
Riemann hypothesis
cannot prove this without any hypothesis the additional factor neutralizes to a certain extent the peculiarities of o- less than 1. (5), even for values of
THEOREM
Since
37*.
o-
greater than i
rT1 1)
and
less
than
y) = 0{2 -^-
i+
'}.
rcz
>0,
if
o-
2,
</> 3
(s)
o-
2.
Hence,
the
<
(5)
of
3.52
is
a (s),
and
Jr
<l,
-27ri
f v((r,
J<r<>
JO
f* F(<r +
it^idt.
Replacing
Tby 27
7
parts,
2irP{v(<r, 27 )-v(o-, T
^<r
)}^
/-oo
I
2T
yr
log
(<TO
if)
dt +
{am
\l/ z
(0-
7<r
2^ -am
i/^(cr
\l/
(o-
+ fT )
da-.
+ am
(o-
+ 2^7^ - am
+ ^T7) }
The integrals involving am (s) are 0(log 7"), by the concluding remark of 3.53. Similarly the integrals involving am z (s) are (log z)] for, as in the proof of (17) of the Introduction, am i/^ (s) = (#) for
<r
2,
where q
*
is
R^(<r +
+ ^z (<r~it)}
(1),
Landau
(7).
57
it).
Since fa (s)
Finally
o-
(Z
it
(log
z).
am fa (*) r
(<r^)
>
in
2.
Also, taking
any
(J
/-2T
<
1)
and proceeding as
3.54, r2T
|
T log *.()|fc
|
(-I
if loglfcGOI'rfiSiT'logji/ (.! JT JT
-2T
l+^R {9
(1)
SR JT
2?'T
/2T
/-27
{^,
first
()-!}* +i JT |^()-1|*.
term by writing
/-2-M2'
/-2
We
+ 2ir
Ar
iT
{*.()-!}&= ^o/
+/
^2
-j-
+ 2'iT
+
iT J2
+ /T
<7
+ 2iT
The first and third terms are 0(T 1 ~ z l ~ ), since In the second term we write z (s) is of this form.
cr
<j>
where
a^
= 0,
while, for
n>
l
1,
||
=
I
2
r w, r
<^
= ft(r)|=< rf(n)
= 0(W);
is
and integrating term by term we see that the integral in question l~ z 1 "*). bounded. Hence the first term on the right of (1) is (T
cr
3.62.
We have
now
arrived at the kernel of the problem, viz. the (1). Here we use Theorem 19 with
Tj
and obtain
<k()-l= 2
=
n~*
n<T
for
n<z
S fi(n)n- 8 -l
where
(if
<
t)
bn
n < z and
for
n>zT-, and
6 n like
,
aw
is
(n*).
Hence
rZT
I
rZT
2 ^bntr'^dt^T^bn or* + 22' bm bn (mn)-" J
|
I
j.
(n/mf dt
0(T
of
w-
')
S2
7
(i)-'/(logw/)}
-*^) +
by the
{(zT
2-2
^}
we obtain
lemma
2.13.
/"2T
Putting z =
n->\*dt
T*~\
\-S.b n
58
so that, writing
<T
for
cr
f
J<T9
7
,
{v
(cr,
2T
-v
(tr,
T}} d<r=
(a fortiori)
J<r
(cr,
T)d<r=
T)
A^
(
./(To
=
3-63.
If
19,
~
(
2(r
- 1 >' +0
w+ ) =
1 ~ ( 2cr
~
<>
W+*).
Theorem
instead of
THEOREM
<r
greater than %
We
7%^ remainder in
that
(T).
3.71.
We know
where ir8(T) -
am
C(i +
^'T
),
variation along 2, 2 + iJP, J + iT. The behaviour of the function S(T) appears to be very complicated. It must have a discontinuity k where passes through the ordinate of a zero of (s) of order Jc (since the term
(l/T) is in fact continuous). Between the zeros N(T) is constant, so that the variation of S(T) must just neutralise that of the other terms.
We
know
also that
is
8(T) = 0(log
it
presumably overwhelmed by the variations of S(T) apparently, been proved that S(T) is unbounded).
if
we
the term in
8 ()
certainly plays a
nmch
we
shall
presently prove, it is still only (log T). frequent variations in the sign of 8(t).
*
Presumably
this is
due to
Titchmarsh
(5),
59
We
write
We
shall begin
by proving.
THEOREM 39*
We return
part.
The term
to 3.53 (2) with o- = -|, /5 -- oo and this time take the real in v (<r, being purely imaginary, disappears, and we
,
T\
obtain
log |(<r)
I
AT ./*
log
(<r
T)
Jo|
4./o
irS(0
*=
0.
The
first
term
is
constant,
and
|
h
Hence the
3.73.
f log
(cr
+ iT) AT =
(e~
A
}
d<r=0 (1).
result.
THEOREM 40 1.
& (0 =
s to
(log 0-
& (supposing, as we clearly may, Integrating 1.83 (1) from that t is not equal to the ordinate of any zero), we obtain
2
logC(2 +
)-logC(*)=
i
2
Y!<I
{log(2 +
i*-p)-log(-p)}+0(iogO.
and there are
(log
)
/o)
are bounded,
(*)=
l
log(*-p)+00ogO-
Hence
last
sum
floga+l)sflog{(ir-j8) ^2
r 2
Hence
and the
result
log
AT =
(log 0,
39.
is
now
follows from
Theorem
that
Cramer
(2),
f Littlewood
(4).
$ F. and E. Nevanlinna
(1), (2).
60
3.81.
zeros of
41*.
tend to zero.
begin by proving that the gaps are bounded. from 3.71 (1), and the fact that S(f) = (log t), that
We
Since
it
follows
if
a sufficiently large constant, this really tells us nothing new. But it serves to introduce the method in its simplest form, and the extension is then easily made.
is
N(T+JET)-N(T)>0
2 + *7 and radii
Consider a system of four concentric circles Oi, C^ C3 C4 , with centre T 4 and 5 respectively. Suppose that (s) has no ^-, 3,
,
MI, M M
2
,
zeros in
C Then
4
.
every branch of log (s) is regular in this circle. Let denote the maximum modulus on d, C2) ft respectively of
straight
.
+ iT; and
let
be the
maximum
C4 Then
by Carathdodory's theorem
M <A
3
Now L < A
log T.
log
M*M?Mf,
where
Since
a
+ /3=l,
</?<!.
4/i=0
(1), it
follows that
J/9 = 0(logPT),
and
in particular that
{exp (log* T
)}
0(7*).
is
therefore untrue,
(s).
7
and so
T+ 5 must contain zeros of f every strip T- 5 ^ t 7 In applying a similar argument to the strip 7
8 is arbitrarily small, it is clear that
circles.
But the
are in no
difficulty
way
4
ideas of the theorems of Carath^odory and Hadamard essentially bound up with sets of concentric circles, and our
Let
can be surmounted by using suitable elongated curves instead. be the rectangle with centre 2 + z'T'and a corner at -3 + i(T+ S),
the sides being parallel to the axes. We represent 4 conformally on the unit circle J94 in the -plane, so that its centre 2 + ^corresponds to z= 0. By this representation a set of concentric circles \z\-r inside
'
Littlewood
(3).
61
_Z)4 ,
Di
will correspond to
such that as
r->
T)
the curve shrinks upon 2 + IT, while as r -> 1 it tends to coinciLet ZV> -V> A' be circles (independent of course of dence with 4
for
D D D
lt
2
,
l+iT, -2 + iT,
respectively.
We
/(*) = log
{*(*)},
s (z) is the analytic function corresponding to the conformal s representation; and we apply the theorems of Carath^odory and Hadamard in the same way as before.
Actually it is possible, by a more detailed study of the functions involved in the conformal representation, to obtain a more precise^result.
We
(s)
has a zero
fi
+ iy such that
\y-t\ <16/logloglog
for every
>
3.9.
S^ p / (p).
p runs through the complex
It is
3.91.
zeros of
S# p /(p), where
to discuss their application there, but they connections with the subject of this chapter. teresting
scope of this
work
We begin
zeros of
(s)
p by considering the sum 2# where p-ft-\-iy runs through such that < y < T, and x > 1.
,
THEOREM
(1)
42*.
We have
if x
is
otherwise
(2)
less
zero.
Then
'
n2 \\og%/n\
A (x)
being zero if x is not an integer. This the series (2") of the Introduction for ($)/ term. Now by the theorem of residues
'
is
easily verified
(s),
r2+iT
(4)
J2+iq
'
/ \
F7H^
{,(8)
x ds =
6
ra+iq
I
ra+iT
r2+iT
2iri
is easily deduced where a < 0, and T is from the functional equation and known properties of the T-function that
*'
2 of, 0<y<T
()/{()
=0 flog M),
*
(rS-l, tZq).
(2).
Landau
62
,
and
(s
f~ao+iq
+
J-oo+i
Now
/
0<y<T
/-i-Hr
/--i
\
J-oo+iT
7-00
and by
1.83
Writing
J-l+iT
J-l+iT
J-l+i(T+V)
y2+(3
we
(log
T) terms,
It
so that the
sum on the right is (1). There are sum is (log T). The result now follows
series
3.92.
--
is
uniformly
convergent in any ^-interval which does not include or end at a primepower. This may be deduced from the previous theorem by partial
summation.
3.93. These results also have interesting connections with the formulae' of Chapter V, which we anticipate for a moment. On the Riemann hypothesis, the vth p is + iyv and we have
,
n-1
v
2 #*= S #H-*y?= 2
x 2
n-l
log
yw
= -i Jaloga;
'
I
x
(u)
xiu du +
#*+*?.
Writing
3.71
(1),
M(T)
n
for the
sum
we have
log
l"
iu M(u) x du =
[M (u) z
+
iu
T-f
yn).
J-
log
~x
iu
du
(log
Handbuch, 364-368.
(s)
63
S &=-i y<r
*Jx log
a?
iu #(w) x du +
(log
T ),
Jy 1
and our
(2)
result is equivalent to
i.e.
am
(|
+ !^)>
_ 3 A! (ri) n<N
we could insert we should obtain a
If
sin (^ log
ri)
*Jn
result of the
numbers p are
prime
given
numbers.
No more
explicit relation
is
CHAPTER IV
THE GENERAL DISTRIBUTION OF VALUES OF
4.1. In the previous chapter we have been concerned almost entirely with the modulus of (s), and the various values, particularly zero,
which
it
takes.
We
now
it
(s) itself,
and the
4.2. One method of dealing with this problem is to connect it with the famous theorem of Picard on functions which do not take certain lemma. * values. We use the
Iff(s)
is
regular
and
a,
<
1,
then |/00
an
infinity of times in 1
8.
Suppose on the contrary that (s) takes the distinct values a and b only a finite number of times in the strip, and so never above t = t say. Let T>tQ and consider the function /($) = {(s)~a}/(b-a) in the
,
24, or Valiron's
Integral
64
circles
(7,
+ IT. Then
and/(s)
in 0",
(s)
is
never
and
1 in
C. Hence,
by the lemma,
and
so
(er
= 0(l)
in cr>l,
+ IT) < A (a, b, a) for 1 <r ^ 1 + Hence 8, TV * which is false, by Theorem 1. This proves the
.
\
theorem.
We
4.3. If we assume the Riemann hypothesis, we can use a similar method inside the critical strip but more detailed results independent of the Riemann hypothesis can be obtained by the method of Diophan;
chapter to developments
4.31.
o-
> 1*
but log
(s), viz.
We
observe that both the functions are represented by Dirichlet series, absolutely convergent for o- > 1, and capable of being written in the
We
form
where fn (x)
4.32.
o-
is
a power series in
x whose
coefficients
do not depend on
s.
We
first
cr
= o-
where
is
consider the values which F(s) takes on the line an arbitrary number greater than 1. On this line
w=l
the amplitudes - 1 logp n are of course all related. But of we shall see that there is an intimate connection between the set
and, as
t varies,
cr
= cr and
the set
V of values
e
assumed by
$ K,
of an infinite
fc,
0,
=
n
S fn (P*-* =
1 (3), (4).
^O
<
number
>
Bohr
65
We
is
which is obviously contained in V, that corresponding to every value v in < % 2 (i.e. to every given set of values $ 1? )> an( &wry e, there exists a t such that
shall in fact
shew that
the set
everywhere dense in F,
i.e.
F(o-Q +
it)
- v < e.
|
is
= or
it is
obvious that
we can
find
N~N(o-OJ
=*
for
in particular for
pn =
<f>
n , or for
Now
since the
linearly independent,
t
we
...
can,
<7#
by
and integers
(ft,
g^
such
iir f] being an assigned positive number. Since/^ (prT* e* $) is, for each a continuous function of <, we can suppose rj so small that
n,
N
(3)
The
result
now
and
(3).
4.33. We next consider the set IF of values which F(s) takes 'in the immediate neighbourhood' of the line o- = <T O i.e. the set of all values of w such that the equation J?(s) = w has, for every positive 8, a root in
,
a|
<T O
<
|
8.
first place, it is
evident that
U is
contained in
W. Further
it
is everywhere dense in easy to see that small 8 (e.g. for S < |(cr - 1)),
W.
a|
o1
<
8,
so that
|
(<T O
it)
F(cr!
it)
<
|
(CTO )
cr a
or
|
(
o-
^o,
<T O
<
|
8).
Now each w
case
it is
in TFis
assumed by F(s)
either
on the
line
a u, or at points o^ + it arbitrarily near the in virtue of (1), we can find a u such that w - u <
line, in
is is identical with V. Since proceed to prove that in both and TF, it follows that contained in and is everywhere dense
We now
(cr )
- o- <
1
66
each of
that
Fand
is
We
this
is
The following
F is
be a sequence of
(v
(<t>i
(v
<f>*
\ ...) u
(v)
in
1,
number
<i>
of dimensions defined
.
.
by
<
</>
<
(<TO
&<*>,
.)
= vv
<
(P v ) is a bounded set of points (i.e. all the coordinates are has* a limit-point P, (< 15 a ...), i.e. a point such that bounded), from (P v ) we can choose a sequence (P ) such that each coordinate
since
it
,
Now
v/t
<t>
r>
of
o> n
as r ->- oo
It is now easy to
so that v is
prove that JP corresponds to v,i.e. that a point of F. For the series for v Vf) viz.
w=
^ (CT
^ ,...)=
v,
is it
uniformly convergent with respect to r, since (by Weierstrass' Jf-test) f is uniformly convergent with respect to all the <'s; further, the nth
e^n)
r-*-oo
as r -* QO
Hence
v
'*)
limi^ Km r-.ao
result.
2
w=l
f(p n~<*<i***
-^
(CT O ,
^,
...),
it remains to prove that 4.34. To establish the identity of F and contained in W. It is obviously sufficient (and also necessary) for is closed does not follow, as should be closed. But that this that
F is
is the set of might perhaps be supposed, from the mere fact that values taken by a bounded analytic function in the immediate neighbour-
hood of a
Thus er* is bounded and arbitrarily near to zero in every the real axis, but never actually assumes the value zero. strip including is closed (which we shall not prove directly) depends The fact that
line.
W
,
on the special nature of the function F(s). Let v = <!> (o- $!, 2 ...) be an arbitrary value contained in F.
</>
,
We
is
member
^
n=l
of TF,
i.e.
that,
in every strip
F (s\
the function
We use
See
2.21.
(s)
,
67
= <r FI (s)
,
We
such that
along
FI (s)
or
=1=
v on the circumference.
distance
t
.
Let
be this
circle translated
= 0- through a
of the proof, that Kronecker's theorem enables us to choose t such that, for every pair of corresponding points s in C and sl in Ci, the difference
than an arbitrarily given c. almost exactly the same as that used to shew that 7 is everywhere dense in V. The series for F(s) and l (s) are uniformly N ~ a iir convergent in the strip, and, for each fixed N, 2 / (p n e* *n) is a con\
F(s)
- FI ($j)
is less is
The argument
w=l
/u^,
.../x#.
It is therefore sufficient to
shew that we
~*
can choose
s
o-
4-
ito,
so that the difference between the amplitudes of pn at ~ and p n 8 e2in *n at s = o-Q respectively, and consequently that
tQ
between the respective amplitudes at every pair of corresponding points of the two circles, is (modulo 2ir) arbitrarily small for n = 1, 2, N. The of the choice follows at once from Kronecker's theorem. possibility
.
4.35. It is now easy to see, by means of a well-known result* in the - l theory of functions, that, when the in the inequality F(s) (^) < is sufficiently small, F(s) must assume the value v inside the circle C.
|
For
let
be the
minimum
value of
\F
(s l )-v\
on
Ci, so that
Si
and
let
us choose
= m. Then we have,
for values of
on
Ci,
Now
where
l)
F& +
=
Sl ) 1 G(s Then H (s^ \<\G (sj on Ci, and hence G ($0 + ff(si) has the same number of zeros inside Ci as G (s^-, and so, since G (o- ) = 0, it has at least
l
(s l
\
Consequently F(s) takes the value v at some point This completes the proof that is contained in W, and are identical. therefore the proof that V and
one such
zero.
inside C.
W
O-
4.36.
We
now proceed
Let
Vn be the set
fn (x)
,
of values taken by
fn (pn~
all
)
'
for
= CTO
i.e.
for
V is the
F
a,
FI, v2
any point of
sum' of the sets of points V19 F2 ... i.e. values Vi + v 2 + where Vi is any point of and so on. For the function log (s), Vn consists
,
. .
.
it
described by
Goursat's Cours
307.
68
4.41.
we can
with
"We begin by considering the function '($)/ (s). In this case V explicitly. The curve of values of n is a circle
its
centre at
Let
= 5cw = T (2<r )/
1}
2
(2o-
).
Then
C
F is the
+ Spn**"
for
independent
set
....
The
circles
V of the values
with zero as
S pn 0** is the sum of an infinite number of common centre, whose radii p l9 p2 form, as it is a decreasing sequence. Now for such a sum of circles we
,
. . .
If p 1 > /o2 + p3 +
annulus
n=l
(ii)
If P!
p2
p3
then
consists
it
is
when we
are in cases
is
(i)
and
(ii)
respectively.
...
,
The complete
w=2
~Pn
is
tn
CTO
> Z> we
are in case
(i)
and
for 1
< o- ^
J5
we
are in
The
(i) is
- 2-2*') - B.
'
results for
The main ideas involved in the proof of Ifchis may be acquired by constructing the various figures corresponding to the case of three circles. For the details of the
investigation see
Bohr
(4)
and
(6).
t Burrau
(1).
f($)
<r
69
a set
'
($)/
(o- ).
(5) takes
on the
line
= <T form
annulus
If o-
> D, R (o- )
is the
and r; if aD, (boundary included) with centre c and radii (<TO ) is the circular area (boundary included) with centre c and radius R;
c, It,
2^
Further, as
CTO
- R.
-* QO
and as
set
cr
-*-l,
THEOREM
tends to
45.
The
neighbourhood of
a- = cr
($)/
(<r ).
<TO
finite limit,
and
R to infinity,
1
is
as
--
1,
The above
= <r (a)>l
a line on which
confine ourselves to giving the result for # = 0; the most interesting case, since the zeros of f '($)/($) are
a.
'
We
(s).
THEOREM
46.
There
is
an
everywhere dense between 1 and E, than E. That is, member greater for <r> E, ivhile (s) =*= zeros in every strip between <r=l and <r = E. infinity of
that the set {or (0)} is
4.51.
We proceed now to
Cn
of points
the study of log C (s). have seen that n consists of all the points of the curve as x describes the circle \x\^p^ a^, the set
We
The
convex curve including the origin. summation' with circle which is bound up with the theorem on which we have been concerned is precisely the quality of convexity.
'
Accordingly the theory of summation of circles can be extended to apply to convex curves, in the following form
:
The
series
of points determinedly the sum of an 'absolutely convergent' convex curves is 'either (i) the region bounded by two convex of
set
curves, of which one is entirely interior to the other, or (ii) the region bounded by a single convex curve. In each case the boundary is included as part of the region.
70
Further
area,
let the
'
and
let
pn
and
be arranged in order of decreasing curves Ci, C2 " p n be the maximum and minimum radii vectores
,
.
from
the origin to
Cn Cn
.
Finally
let
is interior
(i)
if
p/> 2
pn
',
and
in
n=2
case
(ii)
if p/
^ 2
n=2
p w ".
In any case
boundary r of
the region,
and (what
if
R, R"
we have
are the
ff3p*
If f(z) is
jR"Sp".
\
an analytic function regular in \z r, a sufficient condition should describe a convex curve as z describes \z\ =r is that that/(z) the tangent to the path of f(z) should rotate steadily through 2?r as z describes the circle; i.e. it is sufficient that &m{zf'(z)} should increase steadily through 2?r. This condition is satisfied in the case f(z) = log (1 z) for zf (z) = z/(l z) describes a circle including the origin as z describes \z\=r < 1.
;
It is easy to see further that the convex curve described by -log(l includes the origin, and increases in area as r increases. Now
z)
A\z\>\\og (i-z')\>A\z\
and
therefore, for
(MM),
the curve
Cni
o-
large we are in case (i), are in case (ii), the region (<7 ) containing an arbitrarily large circle with its centre at the origin. It is only in the case of circles that the criteria given in the theorem
is sufficiently
o-
is sufficiently
near
we
enable us to determine in
or case
(ii);
all
(i)
for arbitrarj^
with
They do
or
the question
this
whether there exists an absolute constant D> such that we are in cases
(i)
or
(ii)
according as
>D'
or 1
point demands a
we
are dealing,
and
4.52. The
relations
between
U V and
9
W give us the
($)
following
'($)/
THEOREM 47. On each line o-=o-Q 1 the values oflog(s) are everywhere dense in a region (o-o), which is either (i) the ring-shaped area bounded two convex curves, or (ii) the area bounded by one convex curve. For by
>
{"(5)
71
o-
of
<r
we are in
case
(i).
case
(ii),
and for
values of
sufficiently
near
48.
to 1
we are in
set
is
THEOREM
The
o-
neighbourhood of
= OTO
(s)
(o- ).
(o- )
includes
is sufficiently
an
infinity
of times in
result,
(s)
r< 1 we have
1
:
+ 8.
infinitely
<
8.
This
is
4.61.
We
an
infinity of times
It
is
natural
to raise
the question
how
large
a of the number
taken, i.e. the question of the behaviour for < t < T. a ( T) of roots of log (s) = a in <r > 1,
This question is evidently closely related to the question as to how often, as t -*- GO the point (fyt, a^t, ... ##) of Kronecker's theorem, which, in
,
virtue of the theorem, comes (modulo 1) arbitrarily near every point in the ^"-dimensional unit cube, comes within a given distance of an
2 assigned point (^ bx). The answer to this last question is given by the following theorem, which asserts that, roughly speaking, the point (ait, ... a^i) comes near every point of the unit cube equally often, i.e.
. . .
it
does not give a preference to any particular region of the unit cube.
Let
!,
...
ay
be linearly independent,
and
Let
let
volume V.
Iy (T)
the the
is
and
Then
T for
ant)
(modulo 1) inside y.
lim
If
we
call
an
'
a point with coordinates of the form fat, ... a$t\ modulo 1, theorem states that the accessible
points are everywhere dense in the unit cube C. If now yi, y2 are two cubes with sides parallel to the axes, and with centres at accessible points
and
2J
corresponding to t~^ and t 2 it is easily seen that lim /Yl (70//Y2 (2>1.
,
.
For
lies
(ait,
a$i) will
.
lie
inside y 2
{a x (t
^),
. . .
inside yl Consider now a set of p non-overlapping cubes c, inside (7, of side e, each of which has its centre at an accessible point, and q of
which lie inside y; secondly a set of overlapping similar cubes c' such of them and y in Q of them. Since the accessible that C4s included in
it is
72
Now
denoting by
^I (T)
C
the
lie
sum
in
y,
of ^-intervals in (0,
T)
which
and
so on,
c
J-
Making T
-*- oo
we obtain
Is ESi^US p-jSl y P
and the
4.62.
result follows.
'
We
a
THEOREM
number
M (T) of
50.
'
a in
cr
>
A(a)T<Ma (T)<A'(a)T.
We deduce the lower bound from the more general result that if =
oor
is
line
to the
given number
a,
Sr<o"
8 the value
is
A (a,
< t < T. large T, in to consider our former argument of 4.36, used to establish the existence of a root of log (s) = a in the strip, and
cr
,
8)
T times, for
this
To prove
we have
use Kronecker's theorem in its generalized form. saw that a sufficient condition that log(s) = a may have a root inside a circle with centre o- + it and radius 28 is that, for a certain ^Vand corresponding numbers
<x ,
...
We
17
77
(<r
8,
<
...
<#),
From the
intervals, between
generalized Kronecker's theorem it follows that the sum of the 7 and T in which t satisfies this condition, is asymp,
T, and
it is
'
N |- (y/2Tr) T/8 numbers two of which differ by less than 48. If now we describe to circles with the points <TO + itQ as centres and radius 28, these circles will not overlap, and each of them will contain a zero of log ($)-# This
Hence we can
select
more than
in them, no
(T),
it
more general
any given
constant, the
number of
zeros
of(s)
b in
<r>
8,
0<t<TisO(T)as T+x>.
The proof of this is substantially the same as that of Theorem 34, the function (s)-b playing the same part that C (s) did there. Finally the number of zeros of log C (s) - a is not greater than the number of zeros
of
00-0*, and so
is
0(T).
(s)
73
We now turn
to the
longer represented by an absolutely convergent Dirichlet series. But, by a device like that used in the proof of Theorem 37, we are able to obtain, in the critical strip, results analogous to those already obtained in
the region of absolute convergence. For o-^i, log (5) is defined, on each line t = constant which does not pass through a singularity, by continuation along this line from or>l.
THEOREM
whole plane.
51.
Let
CTO
be
a fixed number in
cr
,
the
1.
Then
(s)
takes on<r =
> 0,
Let
This function
is
very similar to the $ z (s) of Theorem 37, but it happens to be more convenient here. Let S be a positive number less than J (o- - J). Then it is easily seen = T (N), from the proof of Theorem 37 that, for Q (<T O> c), Q
N^N
T^T
\bi(<r
+ it)-l\*dt<*T
(<r 1
uniformly for
I
cr
8
/Vi-f-5
<
o-
o^
8
1
>l).
Hence
28) cT
7
.
rT
J 1 J 0-0-5
|&r
(<r
+ it) -
2
1
dcrdt
< (^ - CTO +
Ari+S
/"+ ^ i/-^
for
|Mo- + it)<ro-5
1
1
<^-<&<
v.
^(01-00 +
28)
v,
more than
(1
^/e)
8,
T values of
and
<v +
s/r
for
0<r<8; and
so,
since the circle of integration is included in one of the previous rectangles of integration. Hence, having given YJ < 1, rj < 1, we can choose 8 and c so that
(1)
|&(<r + *0~~l|<i7
(o-o^o-^orj)
(1
/or a
set
of values of
Let
*
Bohr
(7), (8),
(1).
74
where Log denotes the principal value. Then N (s) = exp {Ex (s)}. We < $*, for a- owant to shew that UN (s) = Log (s), i.e. that ljR N (s) and the values of t for which (i) holds. This is true for cr = a-l9 if ^ is -* as o- -^ QO Also, by (1), # (5) > sufficiently large, since \N (s) for o- ^ o- ^o- 1? so that I EN (s) must remain between JTT for all values
&
of
a-
in this interval.
there/ore
result.
We have
("o>
*?>
*/)>
T &TQ (jV),
in
set
of values of
greater
We now
n=l
variables
The
curves.
set
Fof
values of
&N
is
= - log ( 1 - r),
it is easily
= log
(1
+ rn ).
(ii)
Since
Sp"
if
is
theorem
divergent,
is
of the
large enough,
and
N, V includes any finite region of the complex plane. In particular, if and values of the <'s a is any given number, we can find a number
such that
<# (<i,
I
...
<#) = #.
We
I
FN (o"
can then, by Kronecker's theorem, find a number t such that + *'0 ~~ a is arbitrarily small. But this in itself is not sufficient
to prove the theorem, since this value of t does not necessarily |j?#(s)| small. An additional argument is therefore required.
make
N
n-M+l
oo
r m
W>
n=M+lm=l
oo
A,
2TO
n=M+l m=l W?
oo
oo
rn*
2 m~*<A 2
rn \
75
which can be made arbitrarily small, by choice of M, for all N. It therefore follows from the theory of Riemann integration of a continuous
function that, having given c, we can divide up the (N)-dimensional unit cube into the sub-cubes q v each of volume A, in such a way that
,
Hence for
M^ M
(c),
and any
\
\
$M,N <
t
We now
(i)
as follows
/
Choose
so large,
and give
'
. . .
<^ 1
<f>
M
It
3f')
and side
- 2 Iog(l-rn e
27rt
nl
*)-a <e.
so large that,
(ii)
We may also
suppose that
for
Af)-dimensional cubes of
T> T
(N),
of measure
cF)
T.
and Tfor
is,
1,
volume
greater than
determined by the above construction. Then by the 7 extended Kronecker's theorem, /(T ) > ^ d MT if T is large enough. There values of t for which the point lies in one of these cubes, are therefore
^d
and
for
But
for
such a value of
and the
4.81.
result follows.
1, and let a be any complete number of zeros of log (s)-a (defined as before) in the rectangle a<(7</?, 0<t<T. Then there are positive constants A (a, a, /?), A' (a, a, /?) such that
THEOREM
52.
ft
<
number. Let
a> a)
^(T)be
A (a, a, 0) T< La
a,
0)
(T>
To).
76
This
is
should
depends.
the
(b
4.82. An immediate corollary of Theorem 52 is that if bt a < < T7 where number of points in the strip <ft,
4= 0),
then
ar
(T)
is
=b ($)
bt 0i
^(T)>A
(b, a, /?)
Tfor T>
T,.
(s), if it
of This, in conjunction with Theorem 37, shews that the value occurs at all in cr > J, is at any rate quite exceptional, zeros
being infinitely rarer than ^-values for any value of b other than zero.
CHAPTER V
CONSEQUENCES OF THE EJEMANN HYPOTHESIS
is on an entirely different footing from the assume throughout the truth of the unproved Riemann hypothesis, that all the complex zeros of (s) lie on the line (T = J. So all the theorems in this chapter may be untrue. There are two reasons for investigations of this kind. If the Riemann hypothesis is true, it will presumably be proved some day. These theorems will then take their place as an essential part of the theory.
5.11.
This chapter
ones.
previous
We
If it is false,
in this
way sooner
it
or later to arrive
goes, is perfectly
at a contradiction.
coherent, and shews no signs of breaking down. The Riemann hypothesis, of course, leaves nothing more to be said about the 'horizontal' distribution of the zeros. But from it we can deduce interesting consequences both about the vertical' distribution of the zeros, and about our 'order' problems. In all cases we obtain much more precise results with the hypothesis than without it. But even a proof of the Riemann hypothesis would not by any means complete the theory. The finer shades in the behaviour of (s) would
*
still
That f () takes every value except zero infinitely often in the critical strip was proved by Bohr and Landau (3), on the assumption that the Riemann hypothesis is true. On the Biemann hypothesis the proof is much shorter.
77
THEOREM
53*.
We have
(*)
log
{(log
cr
-2* +
<}
uniformly far
\ < CTO ^
1.
Here, and in most of the chapter, we use the Riemann hypothesis in = the form *log(s) is regular for <r> (except at s 1).' We first prove that
(2)
log
0) =
(log*)
uniformly for <r> J + 8(8>0). We apply Carathdodory's theorem to the function log (s) and the circles with centre 2 4- it and radii f - |8 and f 8. On the larger circle
circle
Max
and the
log
(.)
< 2(
|
g)
{0(Iog*) + 0(1)},
result follows.
circles
now apply Hadamard's three-circles theorem to the centre ^ + it (o^ > 1) and radii rx = (T! - 1 - 8, r 2 = o-j - cr, rs = crj - - 8,
where
circle,
We
with
+ 8 TO ^ cr. The function log (s) and satisfies (2) on the largest. Let on the middle circle. Then
is
M be
Now
if
o-j
= o-j (8,
e) is sufficiently large.
Hence
may be
if c is
5.13. Since the index of log t in the above result small enough, it follows that
than unity
i.e.
we have both
(1), (2) *
Littlewood
(1).
78
for
or
so also,
all
values of
<r.
5.21.
is
THEOBEM
54*,
The
of a
series
^(n)n"
J.
is
convergent,
and
its
sum
greater than
Let
(I)
M(x) = 2
ft*g.r
/i(n).
^_
residues gives
(*+*>
T a*
__
s
a?
1
(*)
ZmJz-iT
2 . , ^ - ^ Uf (ft)
=i
1
;
2^J
is
half an
odd
integer. If
n <
#, the
theorem of
Now
A jx. A
If
n > x, we take the integrals along (2 + iT, and there is no residue term. Hence
r^r
iT) and (2
- iT,
oo
- iT),
0)
^) VIV
Since the integrand is regular for a- > \, we may replace the integral by + S-iT, J integrals along the straight lines joining 2-iT, $
2 + iT.
Using 5.13
(2)
we
I
I
a-
=i+
8 is
^+ 8
f
J
+
1
-T
1 \-
-*}dt\
J
(x^ 7)>
Off'
8 Taking 3T= # we obtain
UHS
a" T- l +'dv\
^
(^ r-
1+
).
or simply
(2)
* Littlewood
(1).
79
8
partial summation that the series %p(n)n~ is and since it represents l/(s) uniformly convergent for o-^o<o-^ 1 also, by the theory of analytic for <r> l, it represents it for
now
follows
by
>;
continuation.
of S/A (n) n~ for a- > | is therefore a necessary sufficient condition for the truth of the Riemann hypothesis.
The convergence
and
5.22. The result 5.21 (2) can be replaced by the more precise one*
/
"\
I//Y
"\
n //***
(A
^&
5.71.
This, however, requires the much more difficult analysis sketched in No more in this direction is known. This is in contrast to the
'
corresponding results in the theory of primes, in which ($)/($) occurs in the same way that !/(.<?) occurs here, and in which it is only a power of log x that is in doubt. Problems involving !/(.$) appear to be exceptionally difficult.
3/O) = 0(X)
attributed to Mertens. It is supported by a certain amount of numerical evidence!, though there is nothing in the general theory to suggest it. Indeed the analogy between M(x) and the remainder in
the formula for ir(x) suggests that M(x) may really contain a slowly increasing factor, such as log log log #, which would not affect it appreciably as far as the calculations go.
zeros of
(s)
are simple
J.
fc
and
if
(^T) j
=s
r
A
(2) is true
it
follows that
Hence every
zero,
v } (4)
zero on
0-
= ^ must be
simple;
and
also, if
k + iy
is
_i_=ii
is
There
'(
no great
Landau
difficulty in
t.
(8),
f v. Sterneck (1).
(1).
80
In view of the suspicion under which (2) rests, it is of some interest to notice that, in order to prove that all the zeros are simple, it would be sufficient to know that
(5)
M(x)=o(a*\Qgx)\
we deduce from
i
for then
any fixed
#,
as
a-
-*,
W
and
this
U
Jf00) = G(a*).
would be
false if t
zero.
to say
This
is
as in
true without any hypothesis. For if the result is false 5.21 that the Riemann hypothesis is true. So if the
it
follows
Riemann
hypothesis is false, the result is true. We have therefore only to consider the case in which the Riemann hypothesis is true. But then, if
(6) is untrue,
i.e. if
t,
as<r-^J,
This
is false if t is
is
proved.
5.3.
The function*
(cr).
5.31.
log
define a function v(o-), for <r> (<*+') in logtj that is to say as the lower
We
now
J,
as the order of
bound of numbers
such that log (s) = (log* *) It follows from the absolute convergence of the Dirichlet series for log(s) that v(cr)^0 for or>l. It then follows (as in 5.12) from
Carathdodory's theorem, and the fact that for er > J (actually that v (o-) ^ 1).
Further,
of
v(o-) is
(s)
=
is
(t
)9
that v
(or)
<
oo
a convex function of
or.
This
We
= o^
consider
where k
(s) is
is
a-
to v(o-2) for o- = <r2 ; g(s) is bounded for o- = o-1 , oformly in the strip, and the result follows from this.
and
= o-2 and
,
so uni-
Hence
*
and non-decreasing
(s)
in
Now the
shews
(3),
Littlewood
t See
1.52.
81
A.i(n)n~**; then a slight n=3 adaptation of the argument which proves convexity shews that v (<r)
v(cr)
that
for
O-XTJ,
where
2"^= 2
<x> a- > | ) for Hence v (<r) = for o- > 1, and ^ v (or) ^ 1, and v (<r) is convex, > Incidentally this gives a new proof of Theorem 53.
.
for
v(o-) is
not
known
for
any value of
<r
less
THEOREM
55.
For J <
o-
<
1,
l-<r< v(<r)2(l-cr).
The upper bound is Theorem 53, and the lower bound follows at once from Theorem 17. The same lower bound can however be obtained in
another and in some respects simpler way, though this proof, unlike the former, depends essentially upon the Riemann hypothesis*. Before we come to the proof, however, we require some new formulae involving f (s).
5 .41. The approximate functional equation for (s)/ (s). 2.21 we obtained the approximate functional equation for ($) ~ 8 by combining the formulae 3n~ and \^ n8 which represent the function for cr > 1 and o- < respectively. In the case of ($)/ (s) we have also two formulae, this time both valid for o- > 1
In
l
'
^' (i)
-f$>s4^_ 6+
8
ir
2
-l
r(l+Js)
__
p\s-p
We
\
M
The
-- '(*)_ "/"<
for
^,
***
#*~t
ar*r
--H
^&-
which holds
x>
1, 5 4= 1, s 4=
- 2#,
s 4= p.
last three
be replaced by comparatively small error terms, so that we obtain an approximate functional equation for (s)/(s), valid for o- > J. This, however, is not the formula we actually use. We have already
2.42, 2.51) had some experience of the advantage of using series (in of the form ^an e~ 5n where S is small, as an approximation to San
}
sum S an n<N
Approximations of the
as effective in
much
easier to prove,
(3),
Littlewood
(5).
t Handbuch, 353
(9).
82
As
<*>,
(s)
uniformly for
J^o-^f,
2. 42)
We
have
(as in
(2)
2^<r*
,
to the rectangle
We move the contour to R (w) = that is, we apply Cauchy's theorem ^iT, 2iT, and make T-^QO through certain
Since the P-function
difficulty in justifying
is
no particular
by using Theorem
at
18. The integrand has poles at the points w = p, with residues zeros in the sum with their proper
1,
w-
with residue
Ai
)
-P
- s) 8*- = (I
1
(e~
(8-4 log
f).
_ /i+oc i <(8
r( w -)*
1.83
/" ( (
w\
rf;=0(^log*).
^8
A
v-
P (w - 5) =
The
result
'
(e~
now
follows, since
THEOREM 57*.
We haw
uniformly for
^<o-Q
*
<r<<rl <
(5).
Littlewood
83
By Theorem 56
Now
(2)
i
/-2
-Mo
the integral being dominated by the pole at totic formula for T (z),
w = 1.
uniformly for
a-
Hence
=A 3
n=l
n>t
log (2ra
+ 2) <r^ M
Hence
&= o
2
(8'-
(8^-* log
(8-i log 0,
)~
o-
we obtain the
b
first result.
a-
{(log
*)-*i*} +
=
If
(TX
{(log ty-**i+'}
+
is
2 " 2<r
{(log
/log log
#}.
o-
^ cr2
so
cr2
r1
and
< 2X^!
o- 2
),
this
and
may be
as near to 1 as
we
of the required form ; and since please, the result (with o-2 for o-j)
follows.
5.44. For the purpose of Theorem 55 we require an approximate formula for log($).
THEOREM 58*.
for e~*
(1)
For
fixed a
and
a-
such that
^<ar^l
(a)+e
}
and
^8^1,
log
(s)
{fr~
(log )"
+ 0(1).
56,
same way
*
as that of
(5).
Theorem
but this
Littlewood
84
R (w) = a
only,
in p
w = a + iv,
r ()
or,
since v
(o-) is
continuous, simply
Hence
r
a + z5
Ja-iao
w ^ ?(w-s}\-^&- dw
(w\
(W)
=
and, as in
[V-
<r^l"-*l {log
(|
v
I
{(log )"
(a)+e
}.
Hence
}
-/^ = 2 ^^ 6n
4 (s)
8n
{8
(log
0"
(a)+e
^>
(I)-
This result holds uniformly in the range grate over this interval. We obtain
log
(s)
(cr,
inte-
- 2A
(w)
w- 8 <T 8ri
{$-* (log
)"(
- log
(| + ft)
1
- 2A, ()
-l--=
5.45. JV0w ^ro^/ #A^* v(o-) ^ 1- o-. Theorem 58 enables us to extend 'the method of Diophantine approximation, already used for <r > 1, to values of or between J and 1. We have, by Theorem 58,
(1)
R log
= SA
n
a
+
6n
{*-
(log
<
(a)+e
}
(1)
<^
2 +0( n>N
Now by
2-rrq
,
Dirichlet's
a number
t,
2*
N and
integers
1/9
x^
'N and
q,
|
#log/2ir-^n ^
|
(w=l,
2, ...
7
).
Let us assume
dition of
for the
moment
<
that this
number
t,
t satisfies
the con-
Theorem
flr
8.
For
this
1
2
n<2V
A^ra-^-^
*
Littlewood
(5).
85
term
is
(q'
N
i
-*),
and
1
?
2 Aj (n) n~ a e~* n = y
Sn -^ 2 A (n) n~* e~ ^
^
\
i
A (n) n~* e~ 5n
T
JL-
+
by
5.43 (2).
S)~8n\ \^K' )
^ **
log
T.-p
f} V/
(
1
Ij
We therefore
(2)]
a Let us now take q = [S~ ], where a > third terms on the right are (1), and, since
N=
4
1.
log
^ log q < ^
l
8-
log (1/8),
we obtain
(3)
R log
y
00 > (log
t)
c
~^ +
{(lOg j)-<r+v(a)
,'} j
are functions of
and
Otherwise
3
cr -f
v (a)
cr.
first
5.46. We have still to shew that the t of the above argument satisfies e~^ 8. Suppose that, on the contrary, 8 < e^ (for some arbitrarily small values of 8). Now, as in 1.13, for o- > 1,
f
/i\ (1)
T*
RC(cr^O
6.
u\
for q
^
(2)
Taking
o-
+ log 8/log N,
R R
(o-
But and
since
(2)
it)
-* oo
by
6.
(1),
and
>
27r,
it
follows that
contradicts Theorem
1.
On
the
of
on
<r
1 is
86
5.51.
(1)
We have
+ it)
|
log { (1
+ A.
In particular
(2)
(i
+ *o =
1,
o flog logo,
Theorem
X
i/(i + ^) = 0(iogiogO.
58,
1
Taking <r=
|
a=
(1
|, in
it)
1
we have
(8* log n
log
< 2A
|
(w)
ir <rsn +
1 1
(1).
Now
S/r ^ ^
8
A ww-
<r
+0
is
(1),
and t
so that
|
2A
log
(1
4
(w)
w
|
e~ 8n
- log log
1/8
1/8
(1),
+ &)
(8* log
(1).
follows.
(2)
however possible by an elaboration of the analysis to obtain interesting results about the constants. We know already, without any hypothesis,
that
v
'
log log
.,
'
where y
that
<2 >
is
Euler's constant.
On
we can prove
where
lim 0(1)= (T-^l-O
It
iv(r)/(l-<r).
ft
(1)
1,
so that (1)
and
(2) differ
by a
ft
as is quite possible, v
(<r)
<r,
then
(1)
= i> and
*
the constant
(5).
is
determined exactly.
t Handbuch,
28.
Littlewood
87
as usual, rather
more
complicated*.
is a number arising in the Diophantine ap# < 2. This problem about which all we know is that \ proximation, would therefore be solved if we could prove that (1)= and 3- = 1. we can only say that Actually
log log
8 (t).
5.61. We begin by proving a formula connecting logf (s) with the remainder-term in the formula for N(f). We write
(1)
so that
R(t)=S (t) +
but
it is
(1/0- Thus J2 (0 and #(*) are not very different, sometimes more convenient to consider the former. Let
(2)
(*)=
<j>
1<U<*
Max
|i(w)|
(*>1),
for
so that
(t) is
positive
and non-decreasing
t>l.
THEOREM 60 1.
We
have
< # < j.
I (z)
Writing
= | + ^, where
< 0, we have
all real,
less
than
TbN(T). Now
Substituting for (u) from (1), we obtain a number of integrals which can be evaluated by standard methods, and an integral involving (u).
Littlewood
(6).
t Titchmarsh
(3).
88
The
log
(z)
%iz log z
\irz
log z
(1)
On
log
(s),
-J
{*
1)
(is)
7r-*
fe log s
- \TTZ -
log
(1).
Hence
Now
/
(using Si (u)
=
du
(u) for
u > 2)
~T~2
i \2)
Also
'
+,
_RW-8(u) tf
du
j
{* +
(,s
J)
(y a
t-x) may be
same way.
Hence
log < <>
But
u u
and the
results
R L "T*- n ^ L i^t
/+* JB
(M)
,
.,
[*+*
(0
Hence the
result.
We
have
Landau
(1),
Littlewood
(5).
89
in
Theorem
60.
Then, since
<j>(t)
(log 0,
Jt-logt
U+
i-e.
I (S
J)
Suppose that
fixed
cr
S(t}^0
(log* 0>
that R(t}
(log* 0-
Taen
>
for
>
J,
{
If
^
v(cr)>l-cr
first result.
A<J,
this contradicts
for
cr
sufficiently near to |.
Hence X
^ J,
which
is
the
(for fixed
&>)
&
(j,\
we
S (0 =
what the above argument
a
really shews
that
lim v
<r-*-i
(cr).
The problem
5.63.
viz.,
of the order of
8 (t)
is
v (a).
above type,
S(0<-(log*)*v (cr).
both have solutions for arbitrarily large values of t. This result is suggested by what we know about
functions
Max
and from
this it
I log (5), 0} both have the same v-function as log follows that, if cr > |, the inequalities
(s)
am
>
(log
0"
(<r)
~e
,
am
cr
(s)
<-
(log
t.
v(<r)
"e
It is only a
|.
matter
true
when
is
replaced by
5.71.
THEOREM
62t.
Uog log The full proof of this is too long to be given here but we the main ideas on which it depends.
;
shall indicate
Landau Landau
(1),
(6),
(4),
Titchmarsh
(3).
90
In the
N(T)
is
follows in an elementary way from the fact that monotonic and 0(log T) that, if (t) is defined by 5.61 (2),
<
(1)
^(0 = 0[V{log**(20}l
<
the occurrence of
to a
power
less
than the
first
feature of this formula. It follows that the 5.61 (3) depends on >/<>
log
for
cr -
first
and
in fact
we obtain
(40}] +
{tf<
(s)
[x log log
T V{log t
#
<#>
(40}
+0(1)
>
T.
We
choose
and obtain
0*
(log log
log {
still
(*)
[(log
T)t
{<
(40}*].
Here
<
first.
We
much
next apply Hadamard's three-circles theorem to improve (2), in the same way that we improved 5.12 (2) to 5.12 (1). The effect
of this argument is to divide the right-hand side by a power of log which increases with cr; we obtain, roughly,
(3)
log t
(*)
[(log
T)*-*<"
{<
(40}*].
Now by Theorem
respect to
log log
o-,
and
39 $i(0 depends on the integral of log|f (s)l w^n this integration applied to (3) gives us an extra factor
T in
li
() Ar =
|
[(log
(40}*].
i+1/loglogT
The
J + I/log log T) is of this order. left-hand side of (4) may therefore be replaced by S(f). If there7 fore we ignore the difference between t and 7 and between the various
,
multiples of
t,
(0 =
o [(log o* (log log 0-* {0 (*)}*], for 8 (t). The result for S(i)
1
then follows
5.72. Theorem 62 also enables us to prove inequalities for (s) in the immediate neighbourhood of o- = a region not touched by methods such as that used in Theorem 57.
,
THEOREM
63*.
Since,
by Theorem
62,
<KO
*
Littlewood
(4),
Titchmarsh
(3).
91
Now, writing
N(T) =
M (T) + R (T),
(since
N ()
'
is
non-decreasing)
since
(t)
< Ax log * +
and taking x =
5.73.
I/log log t
tf)
}]
(1),
and making
-*-
THEOREM
64*,
<
cr
log log
jf/'
#= 1 /log log t, the result follows for o-= + l/loglog. It then follows from Theorem 57 in the general case by the Phragm^nLindelof method.
and taking
Again
am
Titchmarsh
(3).
A result in
by Cramer
(3).
92
and
from
(3) follows
5.72;
and
(log log t
I/log log
t.
Mean
value ttworemsfor
is,
S (t) and
Si (t)*.
as
we know from
by the integral
/
log
(or
it)
do-.
|
If
we
in the
2 A2
where
(n)
= Ax
(n) log n.
The mean square of this over (0, T) can be calculated after the manner of 1.23. The result of this somewhat free-handed procedure is
(i)
This result
is
true
and similar
8 (t)
of
making things easier. The case of 8 (t) itself is much more difficult. The series corresponding to that on the right of (1) is 2 {&i(n)}*/n, which is divergent; so that we should expect the mean square of S (t) over (0, T) to be of a higher order than T. Actually we can prove that
(2)
j*\8(t)\*dt>ATloglogT,
but the exact behaviour of this integral remains a mystery. hand we can prove that
(3),
On the other
for
(2)
is
Necessary and sufficient conditions for the truth of the Riemann hypothesis. We have noticed one such condition in 5.21, viz. the
convergence of
^^(n)n~
*
for
cr>. Another
(5),
Littlewood
Titchmarsh
LINDELOF'S HYPOTHESIS
condition*
is
93
that
as
# -*-
<x>
of quite a different type, which to explain here, has been given by Franelt.
A condition
it
CHAPTER VI
LINDELOFS HYPOTHESIS
= (F) or, what 6.11. Lindelofs hypothesis is that (% + it) comes to the same thing, that (cr + it) = (t e) for every a- > For either statement is, by the theory of the function ju (o-), equivalent to > saying that /* (o-) = for or J. The hypothesis is suggested by various theorems in Chapters I and II. We have also seen that Lindelofs
',
hypothesis is true if the Riemann hypothesis is true. The converse deduction however cannot be made. It is therefore of some interest to
be true even
investigate the consequences of the less drastic hypothesis, since it may if the Riemann hypothesis is false, and in any case might
turn out to be
much
easier to prove.
6.12.
(i)
THEOREM 65 J. On Lindelofs
hypothesis
(o-
2*
it)
*~
>
%.
rs df (n)
-2'
k and
o-
may now
take
k,
THEOREM
6611.
is true,
i.e.
if
6.12 (1) holds for every k and cr>^ then Lindelb'f's hypothesis It is sufficient to assume simply that
is true.
i:
*
Biesz
(1),
(2).
f Franel
(1),
Landau
(6).
(11).
Titchmarsh
(5).
94
LINDELOF'S HYPOTHESIS
for every k and <r > |. If (o- + V) is not (*)> then there is a positive -< number A, and a sequence of numbers sv = <r + itv such that with v and l(OI>ax (#>o). On the other hand we know that, for t^ 1,
,
Hence
+ #)-<
if \t
-tv
t~
\
and
v is sufficiently large.
Hence
Take
in (7,
r=f^,
2I )
7
so that the
interval
(tv
-t~ F
tv
+t~ F )
is
included
if
~
tv
=2
^
is
t-*- y
if
which
is
contrary to hypothesis
large enough.
if
Hence the
result.
6.14. we are given a mean value formula, not for all k but simply for a particular value of Jc. It follows from a general theorem on mean values of analytic functions*
We
that
if
for
any value of k
then
f(o-
+ ;o =
For example,
if
which
is
true for k =
1,
k=
2,
4,
C (i
+ <0 =
6.15.
THEOREM
67f-
for every
k.
obvious,
and the
sufficiency
may
be proved by the
'
(1927),
LINDELOF'S HYPOTHESIS
6.21.
95
We
and the
effect
next consider the relation between Lindelof s hypothesis The hypothesis has, apparently, no
it
does give
a new result concerning the number of zeros which can occur in a rectt < T+ 1, o- ^o-^l (O-Q > ), and in fact is equivalent to a angle T
certain hypothesis about this number.
THEOREM 68 *.
Lindelof s hypothesis
(1)
is
necessary and sufficient condition for the truth of that for every <r > |
N(v,T+l)-N(*,
r) = o(log7 ).
7
The
is easily
proved.
We
apply Jensen's
formula
+ it and radius f J8, f(s) being f (s). On Lindelof 's hypothesis the right-hand side is less than o (log ), and, if there are zeros in the concentric circle with radius f - J8, the left-
hand
Hence the number of zeros in the circle of radius f J8 is o (log t) and the result stated, with cr = J + 8, clearly follows by superposing a number of such circles. The converse deduction is more difficult. The following proof is due
:
to Littlewoodt.
6.22. Let G! be the circle with centre 2 + IT and radius f - 8 (8 > 0), and let denote a summation over zeros of (s) in Ci. Let C2 be the
(1),
is
in one of the
sums
2
but not in the other,
*H]_
_L_
S-p
8;
,
|s-/o|
of such terms
is
Backlund
(4).
t Littlewood
(4).
96
Let
3
LINDELOF'S HYPOTHESIS
be the concentric
\l/
circle of radius
of radius J.
(1),
= o (log T) for s in 0, since each term is Then (s) and by hypothesis the number of terms is o (log T). Hence Hadamard's three-circles theorem gives, for s in C3
,
where
a+
/8
1,
</?<!, a and
8.
/?
^(s)=
the o depending on
Now
s /2+35 ^ ( )
<&r
log C (2
+ it) -
log C (i
+ 38 + ft)
4-
38 +
ft
~p)}
= T the
left-hand side
is
o (log T).
Hence, putting
=
7
T and
Since
||
+ 38 +
i7
-p|<^l
i.e.
is true.
6.31.
THEOREM
69*.
On
Lindelof's hypothesis,
The proof is the same as Backlund's proof, given in the Introduction, that (without any hypothesis) S(t) = (log ), except that we now use = (f) where we previously used (s) = (t A ). (s)
6.32. THEOREM 70t. On Lindelof's hypothesis,
(1)
Si(*)
= *0og*).
6.22,
(
We
Hence
log
ft)
Sj log
(a-
ft
- p) +
(log
T)
+ 38 ^ <r ^
2).
/-2
/2
cr
log
((T!
ft) do-!
= 2i
log
cr
(<T!
4-
ft
- p)
dcrj
(log T).
Since
is
2X
(1), it
and as
in
sum
Cramer
(1),
Littlewood
(4).
f Littlewood
(4).
LINDELOF'S HYPOTHESIS
In particular
r2
97
J$+38
38,
log
(s) do|
/*
/i
|y-*|^li./i
Now
Jj
Ji
and
^
^
^*
-^
o-i4-
33
38(log^-l).
Hence
(3)
log 1C
(s) \d<?
=
=
S^
{8
(3
log 1/8) +
(3 log *)
Combining
(2)
and
(3)
=
and
the result follows.
{8
t]
o (log
f)
(1),
APPENDIX
A proof of Kronecker's
theorem.
The following proof of Kronecker's theorem (1.26) is due to Bohr, Proc. London Math. Soc. (2) 21 (1922), 315-316. It depends on ideas
somewhat similar
to those used in proving
It is clearly sufficient to
such that
differs
from
by
less
than
or, if
n=l
that the upper bound of \F(t)\ for real values of denote this upper bound by L.
is
N+
1.
Let us
Let
0(*i,
<i,
<
&,-,
2
,
**) =
+ S ****,
n=l
...
<J>N
1).
\
of \G\
is
-ZV+1,
^=
. .
<fov)}*,
an arbitrary positive integer and we observe that each of these expansions contains the same number of terms. For, the numbers Oj, 02, ... (IN being linearly independent, no two terms in the expansion
where k
is
; ,
Also the moduli of corresponding terms are equal. Hence, by an obvious extension of the lemma of 1.23, the two
of {F(t)}
fall
together.
mean
values
Jo Jo
Jo
common
sum
moduli of the terms in the polynomial expansions. Since the formula of 1.22 can clearly be extended to an ^V-fold
integral,
we have
lim
Hence
also
lim
But plainly
for all values of
F F
k
k ll *
= N+l.
ll * k
^L
which proves the theorem.
Hence
L^N+1,
BIBLIOGRAPHY
[This is a list of the principal memoirs on the zeta-function which have appeared since Landau's Handbuch der Lehre von der Verteilung der Primzahlen, 1909. An exhaustive list of previous memoirs is given in Landau's
work.]
K. ANANDA-RAU.
(1)
The
infinite
R. BACKLUND.
(1)
Einige numerische Rechnungen, die Nullpunkte der Riemannschen fFunktion betreffend, Ofversigt Finska Vetensk. Soc. (A) 54 (1911-12),
(2)
No. Sur
3.
les ze'ros
1979-1981.
(3)
XjHber die
Nullstellen der
Riemannschen Zetafunktion,
Ada
Math. 41
(1918), 345-375.
(4)
tJber die Beziehung zwischen Anwachsen und Nullstellen der Zetafunktion, Ofversigt Finska Vetensk. Soc. 61 (1918-19), No. 9.
H. BOHR.
(1)
(s)
in der
Halbebene <r>
1,
Gottinger Nachrich-
(2)
Sur
1'
f ((r+it) de
existence de valeurs arbitrairement petites de la fonction f (s) = Riemann pour or > 1, Oversigt Vidensk. Selsk. K<j>benhavn (1911),
201-208.
(3)
Sur
la fonction f (s)
dans
le
demi-plan <r>
1,
1078-1081.
(4)
(5)
Uber
die Funktion
Note sur
la fonction zdta
Dirichletscher Reihen, Acta Math. 36 (1913), 197-240. (7) Sur la fonction f () de Riemann, Comptes Rendus 158 (1914), 1986-1988. (8) Zur Theorie der Riemannschen Zetafunktion im kritischen Streifen,
(s) und fa(s) in der Nahe der Geraden crl, Nachrichten (1910), 303-330. Gottinger
100
(2)
BIBLIOGRAPHY
(3)
tiber die Zetafunktion, Rend, di Palermo 32 (1911), 278-285. Beitrage zur Theorie der Riemannschen Zetafunktion, Math. Annalen 74 (1913), 3-30.
(4)
Ein Satz
iiber Dirichletsche
(5)
und die Z-Funktionen, Rend, di Palermo 37 (1914), 269-272. Sur les ze>os de la fonction f (s) de Riemann, Comptes Rendus 158
106-110.
tiber das Verbal ten von 1/f richten (1923), 71-80.
(s)
(6)
o-
= l,
Gottinger
Nach-
(7)
J.
E. LITTLEWOOD.
Sur
la fonction ((s)
dans
C.
(1)
BUREAU.
Numeriscbe Losung der Gleicbung
die Reihe der Prirnzablen
(1912), 51-53.
\.2t _ D
2
n
2
^ J^ wo p \.p
~
F. CARLSON.
(1)
(2),
f-Funktion, Arkiv for Mat. Astr. och Fysik 15 (1920), No. 20. (3) Contributions & la the'orie des series de Diricblet, Arkiv for Mat. Astr. dch Fysik 16 (1922), No. 18, and 19 (1926), No. 25.
H. CRAMER.
(1)
Uber
die
Nullstellen der
Zetafunktion,
237-241.
(2)
(3)
Studien iiber die Nullstellen der Riemannschen Zetafunktion, Math. Zeitschrift 4 (1919), 104-130. Bemerkung zu der vorstehenden Arbeit des Herrn E. Landau, Math.
Zeitschrift 6 (1920), 155-157.
tJber die Zetafunktion auf der Mittellinie des kritischen Streifens, Arkiv for Mat. Astr. och Fysik 15 (1920), No. 28.
M. FEKETE.
(1)
The zeros of Riemann's zeta-function on the London Math. Soc. 1 (1926), 15-19.
FRANEL.
Les suites de Farey et
le
critical line,
Journal
J.
(1)
BIBLIOGRAPHY
T.
(1)
101
GEONWALL.
Sur
la fonction f (s)
35 (1913), 95-102.
H. HAMBURGER.
(1), (2), (3)
tfber die Riemannsche Funktionalgleichung der f-Funktion, Math. Zeitschrift 10 (1921), 240-254; 11 (1922), 224-245; 13 (1922),
283-311.
(4)
tiber einige Beziehungen, die mit der Funktionalgleichung der Riemannschen f-Funktion aquivalent sind, Math. Annalen 85 (1922), 129-140,
G. H. HARDY.
(1)
Sur
les zeros
de la fonction
(s)
(2)
(3)
new proof
Tidsskrift
(4)
(1922), 71-73.
Note on a theorem
70-72.
London Math.
Soc. 2 (1926),
G, H.
(1)
HARDY and
J. E.
LITTLEWOOD.
(2)
of Diophantine approximation, Internal Congress of Math., Cambridge (1912), 1, 223-229. Contributions to the theory of the Riemann zeta-function and the theory
of the distribution of primes, Acta Math. 41 (1918), 119-196. The zeros of Riemann's zeta-function on the critical line, Math. Zeitschrift
Some problems
(3)
10 (1921), 283-317.
(4)
in the theory of the zeta-function, with applications to the divisor problems of Dirichlet and Piltz, Proc. London Math. Soc. (2) 21 (1922), 39-74.
(5)
On
Riemann
and
zeta-function, Proc.
2
(s),
(6)
Royal Soc. (A) 103 (1923), 403-412. The approximate functional equations
Math. Soc.
(2)
for f (s)
Proc.
London
29 (1929), 81-97.
E. HECKE.
(1)
Zeit-
G. HOHEISEL.
(1)
ttber das Verhalten des reziproken Wertes der Riemannschen ZetaFunktion, Sitzungsber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. (1929), 219-223.
J. I.
(1)
HUTCHINSON.
On
27 (1925), 49-60.
102
A. E. INGHAM.
(1)
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Mean- value Theorems in the theory of the Riemann London Math. Soc. (2) 27 (1926), 273-300.
zeta-function, Proc.
H. D. KLOOSTERMAN.
(1)
Een
Vierteljahrsschr.
Naturf.
Oes. Zurich 56 (1911), 125-148. tiber die Nullstellen der Zetafunktion, Math.
(3)
tiber einige
Summen,
(4)
funktion abhangen, Acta Math. 35 (1912), 271-294. tiber die Hardy sche Entdeckung unendlich vieler Nullstellen der Zeta-
(5)
funktion mit reellem Teil Math. Annalen 76 (1915), 212-243. Neuer Beweis eines Satzes von Herrn Valiron, Jahresbericht der Deutschen
,
tiber die Nullstellen der Zetafunktion, Math. Zeitschrift 6 (1920), 151-154. tiber die Nullstellen der Dirichletschen Reihen und der Riemannschen
(8)
(9)
f-Funktion, Arkiv for Mat. Astr. och Fysik 16 (1921), No. 7. tiber die Mobiussche Funktion, Rend, di Palermo 48 (1924), 277-280. "Ober die Wurzeln der Zetafunktion, Math. Zeitschrift 20 (1924), 98-104.
tiber die f-Funktion
(10)
und
105-125.
(11),
Franel, Gottinger
Nachrichten (1924), 202-206. (12) tiber die Riemannsche Zetafunktion in der Palermo 50 (1926), 423-427.
(13)
Nahe von
o-=l, Rend, di
tionen, Math. Zeitschrift 26 (1927), 170-175. (14) Bemerkung zu einer Arbeit von Hrn. Hoheisel liber die Zetafunktion, Sitzungsber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. (1929), 271-275.
J. E.
(1)
LITTLEWOOD.
la fonction f (s)
,
Quelques consequences de Fhypothese que n'a pas de ze"ros dans le demi-plan (s) >
de Riemann
263-266.
(2)
Researches in the theory of the Riemann f-function, Proc. London Math. Soc. (2) 20 (1922), Records XXII-XXVIII.
(3)
Two
notes on the
Riemann
zeta-function, Proc.
zeta-function, Proc.
Camb. Phil.
Camb. Phil.
Soc. 22
(1924), 234-242.
(4)
On
On
Riemann
Soc. 22
(1924), 295-318.
(5)
Riemann
zeta-function, Proc.
London Math.
175-201.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
(6)
103
Soc.
(2)
On
27 (1928),
349-357.
(1)
E. MATTSON. Eine neue Darstellung der Riemann'schen Zetafunktion, Arkiv for Mat. Astr. och Fysik 19 (1926), No. 26.
Hj. MELLIN.
(1)
Annales Acad.
Scientiarum
11.
(2)
of Fourier Series in the analytic theory of numbers, Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 34 (1928), 585-596. Poisson's summation formula and the Riemann zeta-function, Journal
London Math.
C.
(1 )
Soc.
4 (1929), 285-291.
H. MUNTZ.
Beziehungen der Riemannschen f-Fuiiktion zu willkiirlichen reellen Funktionen, Mat. Tidsskrift
(1922), 39-47.
F. and R.
(1), (2)
NEVANLINNA.
Bemerkung
Riemannschen -Funktion,
(3)
On the zeros of certain trigonometric integrals, Journal London Math. Soc. 1 (1926), 98-99. tJber die algebraisch-funktionentheoretischen Untersuchungen von
J. L. "Cfber
(4)
V. Jensen, Kgl. Danske VidensJcabernes Selskab. 7 (1927), No. 17. trigonometrische Integrale mit nur reellen Nullstellen, Journal fur Math. 158 (1927), 6-18.
W.
S.
(1)
RAMANUJAN.
(2)
New expressions for Riemann's functions (s) and S (t). Quart. J. of Math. 46(1915), 253-261. Some formulae in the analytic theory of numbers, Messenger of Math. 45
(1915), 81-84.
M. RIESZ.
(1)
(1916), 185-190.
C. SIEGEL.
(1)
Bemerkung zu einem Satz von Hamburger iiber die Funktionalgleichung der Riemannschen Zetafunktion, Math. Annalen 86 (1922), 276-279.
v.
R.
(1)
STEBNECK.
iiber die zahlentheoretische
Funktion
<T(T&),
Cambridge
(1912),
1,
341-343.
104
E. C. TlTCHMARSH.
(1)
BIBLIOGRAPHY
The mean- value
of the zeta-function on the critical line, Proc.
London
(2)
Math. Soc. (2) 27 (1928), 137-150. On the remainder in the formula for
in the strip
< <
t
(3)
consequence of
(T\ the number of zeros of f (*) London Math. Soc. (2) 27 (1928), 449-458. the Riemann hypothesis, Journal London Math. Soc.
T, Proc.
2 (1927), 247-254.
(4)
On an On
(2)
inequality satisfied
by the zeta-function
of
Biemann, Proc.
Soc.
London Math.
(5)
Soc. (2) 28 (1928), 70-80. the zeros of the Biernami zeta-function, Proc.
London Math.
30 (1929), 319-321.
(6)
Mean
value theorems in the theory of the Riernann zeta-function. Messenger of Math. 58 (1929), 125-129.
G. VALIRON.
(I)
Sur les fonctions entieres d'ordre nul et d'ordre and Annales de Toulouse (3) 5 (1914), 117-257.
la
fini,
Ch. de
(1),
VALLEE-POUSSIN.
(1916), 418-421,
(2) Sur les zeros de f (s) de Riemann, Comptes Rendus 163 and 471-473.
A. WALFISZ.
(1)
A. WALTHER.
(1)
H. WEYL.
(1)
S.
(1)
de
la fonction f(s)
12.
On
Riemann
Camb.
Phil. Soc.
21 (1921), 17-21.
B.
(1)
M. WILSON.
Proofs of
WILTON.
Note on the
180-183.
zeros of
(1915),
(2)
A proof of Burnside's formula for log r (#+ 1) and certain allied properties
of Riemann's f -function, Messenger of Math. 52 (1922), 90-93.
CAMBRIDGE