My answer to the Riemann Hypothesis

[DennisK]

I've looked deeper into Riemann's zeros (something I was actually nervous about), and I've found an interesting series here:

The first number is attained from my program and the second is a zeta zero, divided in half:

81.53 81.52
82.71 82.77
84.96 84.96
86.68 86.71
87.39 87.38

(I didn't have corresponding values for two zeta zeros at 83.59 and 84.54)

Of course, they aren't all this close, but I think that this is definitely enough to warrant a second look at my method.

 

[rpenner]

What method?
The non-trivial zeros of the Riemann function to date have all been of the form 1/2 ± ix

And there are an awful lot of them. And they are awfully close together. But your data is flawed so the pattern you are seeing isn't real.

http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/zeta_tables/zeros2 (First thousand)

(0.5, 163.030709687+) is not 163.06 ± 0.02
(0.5, 165.5370691879+) is not 165.42 ± 0.02
(0.5, 167.184439978+) is not part of your method or pattern
(0.5, 169.0945154+) is not part of your method or pattern
(0.5, 169.911976+) is suggestive of 169.92 ± 0.02 except you didn't justify the multiplication by two, or the transform between the real axis and the critical strip in the complex plane
(0.5, 173.4115365+) is not 173.36 ± 0.02
(0.5, 174.75419+) is not 174.78 ± 0.02

 

[funkstar]

It is commonplace in software to prove your answer mathematically as a Cauchy sequence.

No, it's not.

My analysis is perfectly correct.

No, it's not.

 

[AlphaNumeric]

I suspect Jack came across the Wikipedia page on Cauchy sequences. If you google 'algorithm, Cauchy sequence' then Google highlights the section of that Wiki page which looks very much like what Jack said, except the way Jack said it suggests he doesn't understand what he's saying.

http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF...avclient&gfns=1&q=algorithms,+Cauchy+sequence

Hit 6 :

Cauchy sequence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is often exploited in algorithms, both theoretical and applied, where an iterative process can be shown relatively easily to produce a Cauchy sequence, ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cauchy_sequence

 

[Jack_]

I suspect Jack came across the Wikipedia page on Cauchy sequences. If you google 'algorithm, Cauchy sequence' then Google highlights the section of that Wiki page which looks very much like what Jack said, except the way Jack said it suggests he doesn't understand what he's saying.

http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF...avclient&gfns=1&q=algorithms,+Cauchy+sequence

Hit 6 :

Cauchy sequence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is often exploited in algorithms, both theoretical and applied, where an iterative process can be shown relatively easily to produce a Cauchy sequence, ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cauchy_sequence

Yea, I cannot understand Cauchy sequences and knew to apply them in this context which you did not.

You sure have things figured out. Thank goodness wiki is there for you folks.

Oh, you may go to my website and look at proof 3 under proofs.

That employs a Cauchy sequence to prove convergence in the recursive function I provided.

Here, I am providing the link. The proof only depends on light being a constant c in the vacuum of space. Move down to theorem 3. I think you mentioned, I do not understand how to add and subtract. Then, you should have no trouble with the math.

http://www.proofofabsolutemotion.com/theorems.pdf

Since, you understand all this, it will not be difficult for you to explain it to everyone here.

I will be looking forward to it.