Back to AtD Zeta functions

[Lemuel Underwing]

As someone who suffers from an inability to properly understand maths I
thank you, 'twas certainly helpful.

It is hard for me to imagine who any of this has to do with Annie
Leibovitz... I take it some folks have a hard time figuring out what is
just *White Noise* in Pynchon...?

On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Prashant Kumar <
siva.prashant.kumar at gmail.com> wrote:

> First we're gonna need complex numbers, made of a real part (normal
> numbers) plus an imaginary part. Imaginary numbers are defined by multiples
> of *i*=squareroot(-1). Imagine a 2D graph, the vertical axis marked with
> multiples of *i* and the horizontal axis with real numbers. So on this 2D
> graph we can define a complex number as a point. Call such a point s =
> \sigma + \rho, \sigma and \rho being real and imaginary numbers resp.
>
> Since it takes real and imaginary inputs, and we plot the output in the
> third dimension, the Riemann Zeta function can be visualised as a surface
> sitting above the complex number graph; that's what you saw, Mark (see here
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemann_zeta_function for the same thing
> with magnitude represented as colour).  If I have a RZ function, writing R
> as a function of s as R(s), the zeroes are the values of s for which
> R(s)=0.  The Riemann Hypothesis (unproven) states that the zeroes of the RZ
> function have real part 1/2. Formally, R(1/2 + \rho) = 0. This gives you a
> line on the surface of the RZ function (known as the critical line) along
> which the zeroes are hypothesised to lie. That wasn't too bad, right?
>
> Verifying this hypothesis is notoriously hard.
>
> On 15 July 2012 21:27, Mark Kohut <markekohut at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> "Except that this one's horizontal and drawn on a grid of latitude and
>> longitude,
>> instead of rel vs imaginary values---where Riemann said that all the
>> zeroes of the
>> Beta function will be found."
>>
>> p. 937 Don't know enough math to have a feel for Zeta functions but
>> Wolfram's
>> maths guide online shows Beta functions kinda graphed in three dimensions,
>> with raised sections, waves, folds etc....
>>
>> And all I can associate at the moment are the raised maps, showing land
>> formations,
>> and the phrase
>>
>> History is a step-function.
>>
>> Anyone, anyone? Bueller?
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20120715/3807d38d/attachment.html>