unforum

[Guin]

like this?

http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~perry/maths/riemannshypothesis2/riemannshypothesis2.htm

I think I got to the word Riemann before my brain switched off.

I really think they are yanking our chain.

[donstobbart]

Thats the job, but my brain just says "pass the JD quick..." to stuff like that.

Anyone ?

Don

[PuzzledPineapple]

The equation itself is a definition of a function, so you can't solve it per se. You can plug a number into the Riemann Zeta function and get an answer: the MathWorld page gives its values for a few small numbers. (I had to look it up the other day - I actually used the Riemann Zeta function! Sorry, that was cool to me. Ahem.) But you need a number. And it's still not exactly a solution.

The more likely interpretation of the sentence is that we have to solve the problem of the Riemann Hypothesis. Whilst this thread is trying to be incredibly grammatically correct, I don't think this is a subtle clue to an underlying puzzle. I really think that this is saying we need to prove the Riemann Hypothesis.

That being said, we can't do that. Well, someone here might be on their way, but most of us can't. So we can continue to speculate about other possibilities whilst waiting for the publication of a proof.

[lownote]

Hmm, doesn't Deligne's proof for RM over finite fields count as a proof? (see my post on page 29 for the citation...) OK, its not THE proof of the whole hypothesis, but is a proof nontheless.

[locqust]

So solve could just mean as we thought a while back? Using the equation on the card to test two numbers one we know is a prime and one that isnt?

[BluesScale]

But there are an awful lot of numbers that are primes and even more which are not. We would be lucky to guess the ones that they meant.

Of course, prove used to mean "to test"

Blues

[poozle]

I just wondered, would we be expected to solve it for the 7235733 digit number referanced on the card? Just trying to link that info at the bottom to the card.

And the card indicates solve = prove as it says "$1mil on solving this puzzle." in the bottom right.

EDIT: Also on part 1 of the page that Guin posted it says

[Guin]

[Magma]

Just tried "The Riemann Theorem", a blind stab in the dark as to what a proven hypothesis would be called. No points.

[UKver2.0]

Re: speechless

[Bendover]

I am reading a book about the Riemann hypothesis, and at the point I am at in the book they state the first few Reimann zeros that were calculated were of the form 1/2+ib and the value of b for the first zero is 14.13 The next five zeros in order are 21.02 25.01 30.42 32.93 and 37.59 The title of the book is The Riemann Hypothesis (The Greatest Unsolved Problem in Mathematics ) by Karl Sabbagh If they want us to solve Riemann try one of the zero numbers above.

[EvilGenius]

If I recall rightly the first 1.5 trillion zeros have already been done. My calculator has a bit of trouble with that as it is. BTW - there is no reward for disproving the RH so finding a counter-example will leave us poor anyway. Still, it would, maybe, answer the card. Anyone have a good candidate? Also, there have been at least two, maybe three, Mersenne primes found since 2004 that are larger than the one mentioned (they haven't all been confirmed yet). And the complex part of the zeros doesn't matter at all.

It wouldn't be much trouble to prove that the 723... number is prime. Mersenne primes are more amenable than others to being calculated and verified. I'm sure in my reading I have come accross just this information. Perhaps our proof could be showing what the prime factors of this mumber are. I'm certain I came across that specific info somewhere . . .

[Guin]

Re: speechless

[Guin]

While I am still working on the proff side of stuff this is a linky I found:

http://web.mala.bc.ca/pughg/RiemannZeta/RiemannZetaLong.html#RiemannVerify

to quote:

[x]

SO we solve the Riemann hypothesis for this card...

How bout we photoshop a check with our name, signed by the Clay Math institute. and put a link to that image in the answer box...

...
Honestly if this is what they want from us Im quitting right now. There is no way we will "Solve" The Riemann Hypothesis, without more information.

Proofing the Equation is a long standing problem, with a reward equal to 10 times what mind candy is giving away for the cube. If thats our objective, ill start this as my full time job for the reward, screw the cube.
IF we need to solve the equation for some particular number... well what number? Its not listed specifically on the card. This card just seems like a hoax, its either a ploy to keep us playing indefinately, or some cruel joke answer that will barely make sense as an answer at all.


Im more inclined to think that Mind Candy isnt really keeping careful watch what is said to the community. A comment like "blah blah, Solve Riemann" seems so drab. No thought was put into that email responce at all.