REVIEW 1 cited by
The De Bruijn-Newman constant is non-negative
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
abstract
For each $t \in {\bf R}$, define the entire function $$ H_t(x) := \int_0^\infty e^{tu^2} \Phi(u) \cos(xu)\ du$$ where $\Phi$ is the super-exponentially decaying function $$ \Phi(u) := \sum_{n=1}^\infty (2\pi^2 n^4 e^{9u} - 3\pi n^2 e^{5u} ) \exp(-\pi n^2 e^{4u} ).$$ Newman showed that there exists a finite constant $\Lambda$ (the \emph{de Bruijn-Newman constant}) such that the zeroes of $H_t$ are all real precisely when $t \geq \Lambda$. The Riemann hypothesis is the equivalent to the assertion $\Lambda \leq 0$, and Newman conjectured the complementary bound $\Lambda \geq 0$. In this paper we establish Newman's conjecture. The argument proceeds by assuming for contradiction that $\Lambda < 0$, and then analyzing the dynamics of zeroes of $H_t$ (building on the work of Csordas, Smith, and Varga) to obtain increasingly strong control on the zeroes of $H_t$ in the range $\Lambda < t \leq 0$, until one establishes that the zeroes of $H_0$ are in local equilibrium, in the sense that locally behave (on average) as if they were equally spaced in an arithmetic progression, with gaps staying close to the global average gap size. But this latter claim is inconsistent with the known results about the local distribution of zeroes of the Riemann zeta function, such as the pair correlation estimates of Montgomery.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
An explicit uniform cubic wedge for consecutive Toeplitz minors of the Riemann xi coefficients
For every r ≥ 2 and k ≥ 10^18 r^3, the consecutive Toeplitz minor D_{r,k} of the Riemann xi coefficients is strictly positive, proved without using verified zeta zeros.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.