http://www.arsmathematica.net/archives/2005/07/03/elementary-version-of-riemann-hypothesis/ Dedicated to the mathematical arts. Fri, 05 Dec 2008 13:03:54 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 http://www.arsmathematica.net/archives/2005/07/03/elementary-version-of-riemann-hypothesis/#comment-58293 Ars Mathematica » Blog Archive » Why the Riemann Hypothesis? Sun, 20 Jan 2008 18:36:25 +0000 http://www.arsmathematica.net/?p=78#comment-58293 [...] back when, I had a post about explaining the Riemann hypothesis in elementary terms. I thought I’d go into some more [...] [...] back when, I had a post about explaining the Riemann hypothesis in elementary terms. I thought I’d go into some more [...]

]]> http://www.arsmathematica.net/archives/2005/07/03/elementary-version-of-riemann-hypothesis/#comment-62 Walt Tue, 05 Jul 2005 03:17:20 +0000 http://www.arsmathematica.net/?p=78#comment-62 I imagine the bound is pretty sharp. The Riemann hypothesis is supposed to be a best possible kind of result, and I'd think that applies here. Most numbers won't be close to the bound (for example, for primes the left-hand side is n+1), but for a strictly-increasing right-hand side, it's probably the best you can do. I imagine the bound is pretty sharp. The Riemann hypothesis is supposed to be a best possible kind of result, and I’d think that applies here. Most numbers won’t be close to the bound (for example, for primes the left-hand side is n+1), but for a strictly-increasing right-hand side, it’s probably the best you can do.

]]> http://www.arsmathematica.net/archives/2005/07/03/elementary-version-of-riemann-hypothesis/#comment-61 michael Mon, 04 Jul 2005 20:22:05 +0000 http://www.arsmathematica.net/?p=78#comment-61 I am not suprised I have never heard of it, but I do find myself asking the question (yes, I realize I could read the paper, but I figure you aready have :) ) How sharp is that? I am not suprised I have never heard of it, but I do find myself asking the question (yes, I realize I could read the paper, but I figure you aready have ) How sharp is that?

]]>