Skip to main content

Home/ ErgodicPNT/ Group items tagged Kowalski

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
arithwsun arithwsun

Structure and randomness in the prime numbers « What's new - 0 views

terrytao.wordpress.com/...andomness-in-the-prime-numbers

featured rh zeta

shared by arithwsun arithwsun on 17 Jul 08 - Cached
  • 2 July, 2008 at 6:28 pm Terence Tao It unfortunately seems that the decomposition claimed in equation (6.9) on page 20 of that paper is, in fact, impossible; it would endow the function h (which is holding the arithmetical information about the primes) with an extremely strong dilation symmetry which it does not actually obey. It seems that the author was relying on this symmetry to make the adelic Fourier transform far more powerful than it really ought to be for this problem.
  • 3 July, 2008 at 3:41 am Gergely Harcos I also have some (perhaps milder) troubles with the proof. It seems to me as if Li had treated the Dirac delta on L^2(A) as a function. For example, the first 5 lines of page 28 make little sense to me. Am I missing something here?
  • 4 July, 2008 at 5:15 am Lior Silberman The function defined on page 20 does have a strong dilation symmetry: it is invariant by multiplication by ideles of norm one (since it is merely a function of the norm of ). In particular, it is invariant under multiplication by elements of . I’m probably missing something here. Probably the subtlety is in passing from integration over the nice space of idele classes to the singular space . The topologies on the spaces of adeles and ideles are quite different. There is a formal error in Theorem 3.1 which doesn’t affect the paper: the distribution discussed is not unique. A distribution supported at a point is a sum of derivatives of the delta distribution. Clearly there exist many such with a given special value of the Fourier transform. There is also something odd about this paper: nowhere is it pointed out what is the new contribution of the paper. Specifically, what is the new insight about number theory?
  • ...12 more annotations...
  • 4 July, 2008 at 6:09 am Emmanuel Kowalski A remark concerning Lior’s remark: the function h(u) in the current (v4) version of the paper is _not_ the same as the one that was defined when T. Tao pointed out a problem with it. This earlier one (still visible on arXiv, v1) was defined in different ways depending on whether the idele had at most one or more than one non-unit component, and was therefore not invariant under multiplication by . (It is another problem with looking at such a paper if corrections as drastic as that are made without any indication of when and why).
  • 4 July, 2008 at 8:15 am Terence Tao Dear Lior, Emmanuel is correct. The old definition of h was in fact problematic for a large number of reasons (the author was routinely integrating h on the idele class group C, which is only well-defined if h was -invariant). Changing the definition does indeed fix the problem I pointed out (and a number of other issues too). But Connes has pointed out a much more serious issue, in the proof of the trace formula in Theorem 7.3 (which is the heart of the matter, and is what should be focused on in any future revision): the author is trying to use adelic integration to control a function (namely, h) supported on the ideles, which cannot work as the ideles have measure zero in the adeles. (The first concrete error here arises in the equation after (7.13): the author has made a change of variables on the idele class group C that only makes sense when u is an idele, but u is being integrated over the adeles instead. All subsequent manipulations involving the adelic Fourier transform Hh of h are also highly suspect, since h is zero almost everywhere on the adeles.)
  • More generally, there is a philosophical objection as to why a purely multiplicative adelic approach such as this one cannot work. The argument only uses the multiplicative structure of , but not the additive structure of k. (For instance, the fact that k is a cocompact discrete additive subgroup of A is not used.) Because of this, the arguments would still hold if we simply deleted a finite number of finite places v from the adeles (and from ). If the arguments worked, this would mean that the Weil-Bombieri positivity criterion (Theorem 3.2 in the paper) would continue to hold even after deleting an arbitrary number of places. But I am pretty sure one can cook up a function g which (assuming RH) fails this massively stronger positivity property (basically, one needs to take g to be a well chosen slowly varying function with broad support, so that the Mellin transforms at Riemann zeroes, as well as the pole at 1 and the place at infinity, are negligible but which gives a bad contribution to a single large prime (and many good contributions to other primes which we delete).)
  • Emmanuel Kowalski That’s an interesting point indeed, if one considers that the RH doesn’t work over function fields once we take out a point of a (smooth projective) curve — there arise zeros of the zeta function which are not on the critical line.
  • 6 July, 2008 at 5:28 pm Chip Neville Terence, I have a question about your comment: “Because of this, the arguments would still hold if we simply deleted a finite number of finite places v from the adeles (and from k^*). … (basically, one needs to take g to be a well chosen slowly varying function with broad support, so that the Mellin transforms at Riemann zeroes, as well as the pole at 1 and the place at infinity, are negligible but which gives a bad contribution to a single large prime (and many good contributions to other primes which we delete).)” Does this mean that you would be considering the “reduced” (for lack of a better name) zeta function \prod 1/(1-1/p^{-s}), where the product is taken over the set of primes not in a finite subset S? If so, this “reduced” zeta function has the same zeroes as the standard Riemann zeta function, since the finite product \prod_S 1/(1-1/p^{-s}) is an entire function with no zeroes in the complex plane. Thus the classical situation in the complex plane seems to be very different in this regard from the situation with function fields over smooth projective curves alluded to by Emmanuel above. Does anyone have an example of an infinite set S and corresponding reduced zeta function with zeroes in the half plane Re z > 1/2? A set S of primes p so that \sum_S 1/p^{1/2} converges will not do, since \prod_S 1/(1-1/p^{-s}) is holomorphic in the half plane Re z > 1/2 with no zeroes there. Perhaps a set S of primes P thick enough so that \sum_S 1/p^{1/2} diverges, but thin enough so that \sum_S 1/p converges, might do. This seems to me to be a delicate and difficult matter. I hope these questions do not sound too foolish.
  • 6 July, 2008 at 7:44 pm Terence Tao Dear Chip, Actually, the product has a number of poles on the line , when s is a multiple of . Li’s approach to the RH was not to tackle it directly, but instead to establish the Weil-Bombieri positivity condition which is known to be equivalent to RH. However, the proof of that equivalence implicitly uses the functional equation for the zeta function (via the explicit formula). If one starts deleting places (i.e. primes) from the problem, the RH stays intact (at least on the half-plane ), but the positivity condition does not, because the functional equation has been distorted.
  • The functional equation, incidentally, is perhaps the one non-trivial way we do know how to exploit the additive structure of k inside the adeles, indeed I believe this equation can be obtained from the Poisson summation formula for the adeles relative to k. But it seems that the functional equation alone is not enough to yield the RH; some other way of exploiting additive structure is also needed, but I have no idea what it should be. [Revised, July 7:] Looking back at Li’s paper, I see now that Poisson summation was indeed used quite a few times, and in actually a rather essential way, so my previous philosophical objection does not actually apply here. My revised opinion is now that, beyond the issues with the trace formula that caused the paper to be withdrawn, there is another fundamental problem with the paper, which is that the author is in fact implicitly assuming the Riemann hypothesis in order to justify some facts about the operator E (which one can think of as a sort of Mellin transform multiplier with symbol equal to the zeta function, related to the operator on ). More precisely, on page 18, the author establishes that and asserts that this implies that , but this requires certain invertibility properties of E which fail if there is a zero off of the critical line. (A related problem is that the decomposition used immediately afterwards is not justified, because is merely dense in rather than equal to it.)
  • 7 July, 2008 at 9:59 am javier Dear Terence, I am not sure I understand your “philosophical” complain on using only the multiplicative structure and not the additive one. This is essentially the philosophy while working over the (so over-hyped lately) field with one element, which apparently comes into the game in the description of the Connes-Bost system on the latest Connes-Consani-Marcolli paper (Fun with F_un). From an algebraic point of view, you can often recover the additive structure of a ring from the multiplicative one provided that you fix the zero. There is an explanation of this fact (using the language of monads) in the (also famous lately) work by Nikolai Durov “A new approach to Arakelov geometry (Section 4.8, on additivity on algebraic monads). By the way, I wanted to tell you that I think you are doing an impressive work with this blog and that I really enjoy learning from it, even if this is the very first time I’ve got something sensible to say :-)
  • 7 July, 2008 at 11:01 am Terence Tao Dear Javier, I must confess I do not understand the field with one element much at all (beyond the formal device of setting q to 1 in any formula derived using and seeing what one gets), and don’t have anything intelligent to say on that topic. Regarding my philosophical objection, the point was that if one deleted some places from the adele ring A and the multiplicative group (e.g. if k was the rationals, one could delete the place 2 by replacing with the group of non-zero rationals with odd numerator and denominator) then one would still get a perfectly good “adele” ring in place of A, and a perfectly good multiplicative group in place of (which would be the invertible elements in the ring of rationals with odd denominator), but somehow the arithmetic aspects of the adeles have been distorted in the process (in particular, Poisson summation and the functional equation get affected). The Riemann hypothesis doesn’t seem to extend to this general setting, so that suggests that if one wants to use adeles to prove RH, one has to somehow exploit the fact that one has all places present, and not just a subset of such places. Now, Poisson summation does exploit this very fact, and so technically this means that my objection does not apply to Li’s paper, but I feel that Poisson summation is not sufficient by itself for this task (just as the functional equation is insufficient to resolve RH), and some further exploitation of additive (or field-theoretic) structure of k should be needed. I don’t have a precise formalisation of this feeling, though.
  • 7 July, 2008 at 1:22 pm Gergely Harcos Dear Terry, you are absolutely right that Poisson summation over k inside A is the (now) standard way to obtain the functional equation for Hecke L-functions. This proof is due to Tate (his thesis from 1950), you can also find it in Weil’s Basic Number Theory, Chapter 7, Section 5.
  • 15 July, 2008 at 7:57 am michele I think that the paper of Prof. Xian-Jin Li will be very useful for a future and definitive proof of the Riemann hypothesis. Furthermore, many mathematics contents of this paper can be applied for further progress in varios sectors of theoretical physics (p-adic and adelic strings, zeta strings).
  • Babak Hi Terrance, A few months ago I stumbled upon an interesting differential equation while using probability heuristics to explore the distribution of primes. It’s probably nothing, but on the off-chance that it might mean something to a better trained mind, I decided to blog about it: http://babaksjournal.blogspot.com/2008/07/differential-equation-estimating.html -Babak
arithwsun arithwsun

Notes and unpublished papers of Emmanuel Kowalski - 0 views

www.math.ethz.ch/...notes-unpublished.html

kowalski large-sieve expositary

shared by arithwsun arithwsun on 24 Oct 08 - Cached
  • An alternate argument for the arithmetic large sieve inequality September 2008 This short note describes a very natural and well-motivated derivation of the "arithmetic" large sieve inequality from the dual of the analytic inequality, which avoids the usual trick of submultiplicativity of Gallagher. This is also described in a blog post.
arithwsun arithwsun

E. Kowalski's blog » Averages of singular series, or: when Poisson is everywhere - 0 views

blogs.ethz.ch/...-or-when-poisson-is-everywhere

featured kowalski poisson-distribution polynomial primes

shared by arithwsun arithwsun on 05 May 08 - Cached
  • I have recently posted on my web page a preprint concerning some averages of “singular series” (another example of pretty bad mathematical terminology…) arising in the prime k-tuple conjecture, and its generalization the Bateman-Horn conjecture. The reason for looking at this is a result of Gallagher which is important in the original version of the proof by Goldston-Pintz-Yildirim that there are infinitely many primes p for which the gap q-p between p and the next prime q is smaller than ε times the average gap, for arbitrary small ε>0.
arithwsun arithwsun

E. Kowalski's blog › Modular signs: story of a workaround - 0 views

blogs.ethz.ch/...ar-signs-story-of-a-workaround

Linnik large-sieve modular-form Kowalski expositary

shared by arithwsun arithwsun on 23 Apr 09 - Cached
  • This earlier problem is of considerable importance in algorithmic number theory, and both have been excellent testing and breeding grounds for various important techniques, notably (and this is close to my heart…) leading to the invention and development of the first “large sieve” method by Linnik.
arithwsun arithwsun

科学网-[转贴]西文数学书籍大全 4G多资源 - 0 views

www.sciencenet.cn/...showpost.aspx

books downloads

shared by arithwsun arithwsun on 22 May 08 - Cached
  • Number theory : A Computational Introduction to Number Theory and Algebra - Victor Shoup A Concise Introduction to the Theory of Numbers- Baker A. A Course in Arithmetic (graduate level) - J. Serre A course in computational algebraic number theory - Cohen H. A Course in Number Theory and Cryptography 2 ed - Neal Koblitz A Course In Number Theory And Cryptography 2Ed - Koblitz N Advanced Number Theory - Cohn Algebra and number theory - Baker A. Algebraic Groups and Number Theory - Platonov & Rapinchuk Algebraic Number Theory - IYANAGA ALGEBRAIC NUMBER THEORY - MILNE Algorithmic Methods In Algebra And Number Theory - Pohst M Algorithmic number theory - Cohen H. Algorithmic number theory, vol. 1 Efficient algorithms - Bach E., Shallit J. An Explicit Approach To Elementary Number Theory - stein An Introduction to Conformal Field Theory [jnl article] - M. Gaberdiel AN INTRODUCTION TO THE THEORY OF NUMBERS - hardy & wright An Introduction to the Theory of Numbers - Leo Moser An introduction to the theory of numbers 5ed - Niven I., Zuckerman H.S., Montgomery H.L. Analytic number theory - Iwaniec H.,Kowalski E. Analytic Number Theory - Newman D.J. Analytic Number Theory- Jia & Matsumoto Arithmetic Theory of Elliptic Curves - J. Coates Computational Algebraic Number Theory - Pohst M E Computational excursions in analysis and number theory - Borwein P.
  • Only Problems Not Solutions - F. Smarandache Prime Numbers The Most Mysterious Figures in Math - D. Wells Problems In Algebraic Number Theory 2Ed - Murty M , Esmonde J SOlved and unsolved problems in Number Theory - Daniel Shanks Surfing on the Ocean of Numbers - H. Ibstedt Survey Of Diophantine Geometry - Serge Lang The elements of the theory of algebraic numbers - Hilbert.djv The Foundations of Arithmetic 2nd ed. revised - G. Frege The New Book Of Prime Number Records 3rd ed. - P. Ribenboim The Theory of algebraic numbers sec ed - Pollard H., Diamond H.G. the theory of functions and sets of natural numbers - Odifreddi, P Three Pearls of Number Theory - Khinchin Transcendental number theory - Baker A. Unsolved Problems In Number Theory 2 Ed - R K Guy.djv
  • Introduction to Modern Number Theory Fundamental Problems, Ideas and Theories 2nd Edition - Manin I., Panchishkin A Introduction to p-adic numbers and valuation theory- Bachman G. Introduction to the Theory of Numbers 4th ed. - G. Hardy, E. Wright Lectures on topics in algebraic number theory - Ghorpade Mainly Natural Numbers - Studies on Sequences - H. Ibstedt Math. problems and proofs combinatorics, number theory and geometry - B. Kisacanin Mathematical Problems And Proofs Combinatorics, Number Theory, and Geometry - Kluwer Academic My Numbers, My Friends - Popular Lectures on Number Theory My Numbers,My Friends Popular Lectures On Number Theory - Ribenboim Number Theory - Z.Borevitch, I. Shafarevich Number theory for beginners - Weil A. Number theory for computing - Yan S Y. Numerical Mathematics - A. Quarteroni, A. Sacco, F. Saleri Numerical Methods for Engineers and Scientists 2nd ed. - J. Hoffman Numerical Optimization - J. Nocedal, S. Wright Numerical Recipes in C - The Art Of Scientific Computing 2nd ed. Numerical Recipes in Fortran 77 2nd ed. Vol 1 Old And New Problems And Results In Combinatorial Number Theory - Erdos, P.&Graham, R.L
  • ...2 more annotations...
  • Contributions to the Founding of the Theory of Transfinite Numbers - Georg Cantor Definitions, Solved And Unsolved Problems, Conjectures and Theorems, In Number Theory And Geometry - Smarandache F Elementary Methods in Number Theory - Nathanson M.B Elementary Number Theory - Clark Elementary Number Theory - David M. Burton Elementary Number Theory And Primality Tests Elementary Number Theory Notes - santos Elementary theory of numbers - Sierpinski W. Elliptic Curves - Notes for Math 679 - J. Milne, U. Michigan Elliptic Curves 2nd ed. - D. Husemoeller Geometric Theorems, Diophantine Equations and Arithmetic Functions - J. Sandor History of the theory of numbers Vol.2. - Dickson L.E. Introduction To Analytic Number Theory - Apostol
  • Ramanujan's Notebooks : Ramanujan's Notebooks vol 1 - B. Berndt.djv Ramanujan's Notebooks vol 2 - B. Berndt.djv Ramanujan's Notebooks vol 3 - B. Berndt.djv Ramanujan's Notebooks vol 4 - B. Berndt.djv Ramanujan's Notebooks vol 5 - B. Berndt.djv
arithwsun arithwsun

The Large Sieve and its Applications - Cambridge University Press - 0 views

www.cambridge.org/...catalogue.asp

books featured kowalski large-sieve primes

shared by arithwsun arithwsun on 05 May 08 - Cached
  • Among the modern methods used to study prime numbers, the ‘sieve’ has been one of the most efficient. Originally conceived by Linnik in 1941, the ‘large sieve’ has developed extensively since the 1960s, with a recent realisation that the underlying principles were capable of applications going well beyond prime number theory. This book develops a general form of sieve inequality, and describes its varied applications, including the study of families of zeta functions of algebraic curves over finite fields; arithmetic properties of characteristic polynomials of random unimodular matrices; homological properties of random 3-manifolds; and the average number of primes dividing the denominators of rational points on elliptic curves. Also covered in detail are the tools of harmonic analysis used to implement the forms of the large sieve inequality, including the Riemann Hypothesis over finite fields, and Property (T) or Property (tau) for discrete groups.• Explores new and surprising applications of the large sieve method, an important technique of analytic number theory • Presents applications in fields as wide ranging as topology, probability, arithmetic geometry and discrete group theory • Motivated, clear and self-contained discussions introduce readers to a technique previously confined to one fieldContentsPreface; Prerequisites and notation; 1. Introduction; 2. The principle of the large sieve; 3. Group and conjugacy sieves; 4. Elementary and classical examples; 5. Degrees of representations of finite groups; 6. Probabilistic sieves; 7. Sieving in discrete groups; 8. Sieving for Frobenius over finite fields; Appendix A. Small sieves; Appendix B. Local density computations over finite fields; Appendix C. Representation theory; Appendix D. Property (T) and Property (τ); Appendix E. Linear algebraic groups; Appendix F. Probability theory and random walks; Appendix G. Sums of multiplicative functions; Appendix H. Topology; Bibliography; Index.
arithwsun arithwsun

[math/0610021] The principle of the large sieve - 0 views

arxiv.org/0610021

e-print featured kowalski large-sieve

shared by arithwsun arithwsun on 23 Jul 08 - Cached
  • We describe a very general abstract form of sieve based on a large sieve inequality which generalizes both the classical sieve inequality of Montgomery (and its higher-dimensional variants), and our recent sieve for Frobenius over function fields. The general framework suggests new applications. We get some first results on the number of prime divisors of ``most'' elements of an elliptic divisibility sequence, and we develop in some detail ``probabilistic'' sieves for random walks on arithmetic groups, e.g., estimating the probability of finding a reducible characteristic polynomial at some step of a random walk on SL(n,Z). In addition to the sieve principle, the applications depend on bounds for a large sieve constant. To prove such bounds involves a variety of deep results, including Property (T) or expanding properties of Cayley graphs, and the Riemann Hypothesis over finite fields. It seems likely that this sieve can have further applications.
1 - 10 of 10
Showing 20▼ items per page