/sci/ - Science & Math

So here's the final page. The gist of the proof is that the author starts with the Dirichlet eta sum, which is a known equivalent to the RH, breaks the sum into 6 parts, shows when adding the parts makes the original sum equal to zero, shows the relation between the 6 parts, and shows that the only value of the real part that lets the original sum equal 0 is when it is 1/2.

Nothing like sitting around posting Riemann proofs on a Friday night, am I right?

Almost done, I was trying not to spam too much at once, only 3 more pages. Might as well post them though, in case someone does want to read through it.

>>10328563
Hey Thanks anon, I agree Math is a Language of the Universe. The proof I'm posting pics of hasn't been around long, so it hasn't been proven or debunked yet, but it seems to have some teeth to it, at least from my amateur point of view. I figured a few on sci could appreciate it, whether it was right or not, it's a good conversation piece.

What good comes the solution? I know there are many other problems which are put in terms of the RH, are any of them in and of themselves notable? Could it lead to more efficient algorithms, and thus save people time, or is really just for the edification of some mathematicians?

>>10328376
That would make an interesting proof. Prove you can't prove the Riemann hypothesis using standard complex analytic techniques.

>>10328376
Not me of course, but then if it can't be solved through standard complex analytic techniques any errors in such an approach should be easy to find.Then that person would know what not to do, and learn something in the process. That's good to know.

>>10328316
Now that's not very nice. I'm just asking what that person should do if they did solve it. What would you do? And let's say I was that person, would you really want to be talking that way to person that solved it?

Page 2

Say someone did stumble across a Proof to the Riemann Hypothesis, what should that person do next?

What websites or journals should the person contact? Which should they avoid? Where should the person look for peer review? Is /sci a good place for preliminary review? How about math stack exchange, or xkcd?

What other considerations would you take if it were you?

I've been studying some higher category theory to get some understanding of what it means for a category to be [math](n, r)[/math]. Then, apply some meme magic, and hopefully I would have a slight generalization of (topological) homotopy.

For instane the sequence 1,2,3,4,5,6,.. seems to have a pattern where it is incrementing by 1. With this we can predict that 7,8,9 are the next numbers in the sequence. Similary, the sequence 2,4,6,8,10,... has the function f(x)=2x. But what about a seemingly random sequence like 34,67,29,1,1,52,3,... How would we know whether this series is truly random or whether it can be modeled by an extremely complex function and sucessfully predicted. If there is a way, how do mathmatician do it (What is the technique called)?

got

/thread or troll me :/

no im fucking retarded and dont understand when its not in standard from

need help with math :/