Chebyshev's bias-conjecture and the Riemann Hypothesis












1














Chebyshev's bias-conjecture that says "there are more primes of the form 4k + 3 than of the form 4k + 1" and the Riemann Hypothesis are equivalent? That means, one implies the other (if and only if)?






nt.number-theory analytic-number-theory prime-numbers riemann-hypothesis







share|cite|improve this question





























    1














    Chebyshev's bias-conjecture that says "there are more primes of the form 4k + 3 than of the form 4k + 1" and the Riemann Hypothesis are equivalent? That means, one implies the other (if and only if)?






    nt.number-theory analytic-number-theory prime-numbers riemann-hypothesis







    share|cite|improve this question



























      1












      1








      1







      Chebyshev's bias-conjecture that says "there are more primes of the form 4k + 3 than of the form 4k + 1" and the Riemann Hypothesis are equivalent? That means, one implies the other (if and only if)?






      nt.number-theory analytic-number-theory prime-numbers riemann-hypothesis







      share|cite|improve this question















      Chebyshev's bias-conjecture that says "there are more primes of the form 4k + 3 than of the form 4k + 1" and the Riemann Hypothesis are equivalent? That means, one implies the other (if and only if)?






      nt.number-theory analytic-number-theory prime-numbers riemann-hypothesis




      nt.number-theory analytic-number-theory prime-numbers riemann-hypothesis






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited 10 hours ago









      Martin Sleziak

      2,92032028




      2,92032028










      asked 15 hours ago









      Dimitris Valianatos

      613412




      613412






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          12














          Chebyshev made the following assertion, which is interpreted as saying that there are more primes of the form $4n+3$ than of the form $4n+1$:
          $$
          lim_{xtoinfty} sum_{pge3} (-1)^{(p-1)/2} e^{-p/x} = -infty.
          $$
          It was proved by Hardy/Littlewood and Landau that this assertion is equivalent to the generalized Riemann hypothesis for the Dirichlet $L$-function
          $$
          L(s,chi_{-4}) = 1 - 3^{-s} + 5^{-s} - 7^{-s} + 9^{-s} - 11^{-s} + cdots
          $$
          corresponding to the nonprincipal character (mod 4).




          • G. H. Hardy and J. E. Littlewood, Contributions to the theory of the Riemann zeta-function and the theory of the distribution of primes, Acta Math. 41 (1916), no. 1, 119–196

          • E. Landau, Über einige ältere Vermutungen und Behauptungen in der Primzahltheorie, Math. Z. 1 (1918), 1–24






          share|cite|improve this answer



















          • 1




            What was the paper of Ingham? I only knew that Landau in 1918 had shown the equivalence (Hardy and Littlewood did GRH for the character mod 4 implies Chebyshev's conjecture). See Math. Zeitschrift 1 (1918), pp. 1-24 and 213-219.
            – KConrad
            8 hours ago












          • Sorry, brain fart on my end—it was indeed Landau. Thanks @KConrad
            – Greg Martin
            3 hours ago



















          6














          Chebyshev's bias is consistent with the Riemann Hypothesis. I like Terry Tao's explanation in his blog:




          [..] the bias is small [..] and certainly consistent with known or conjectured positive results such as Dirichlet’s theorem or the generalised Riemann hypothesis. The reason for the Chebyshev bias can be traced back to the von Mangoldt explicit formula which relates the distribution of the von Mangoldt function ${Lambda}$ modulo ${q}$ with the zeroes of the ${L}$-functions with period ${q}$. This formula predicts (assuming some standard conjectures like GRH) that the von Mangoldt function ${Lambda}$ is quite unbiased modulo ${q}.$ The von Mangoldt function is mostly concentrated in the primes, but it also has a medium-sized contribution coming from squares of primes, which are of course all located in the quadratic residues modulo ${q}.$ (Cubes and higher powers of primes also make a small contribution, but these are quite negligible asymptotically.) To balance everything out, the contribution of the primes must then exhibit a small preference towards quadratic non-residues, and this is the Chebyshev bias.




          See also Rubinstein and Sarnak MR review here.






          share|cite|improve this answer





















            Your Answer





            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            });
            });
            }, "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "504"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f320102%2fchebyshevs-bias-conjecture-and-the-riemann-hypothesis%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            12














            Chebyshev made the following assertion, which is interpreted as saying that there are more primes of the form $4n+3$ than of the form $4n+1$:
            $$
            lim_{xtoinfty} sum_{pge3} (-1)^{(p-1)/2} e^{-p/x} = -infty.
            $$
            It was proved by Hardy/Littlewood and Landau that this assertion is equivalent to the generalized Riemann hypothesis for the Dirichlet $L$-function
            $$
            L(s,chi_{-4}) = 1 - 3^{-s} + 5^{-s} - 7^{-s} + 9^{-s} - 11^{-s} + cdots
            $$
            corresponding to the nonprincipal character (mod 4).




            • G. H. Hardy and J. E. Littlewood, Contributions to the theory of the Riemann zeta-function and the theory of the distribution of primes, Acta Math. 41 (1916), no. 1, 119–196

            • E. Landau, Über einige ältere Vermutungen und Behauptungen in der Primzahltheorie, Math. Z. 1 (1918), 1–24






            share|cite|improve this answer



















            • 1




              What was the paper of Ingham? I only knew that Landau in 1918 had shown the equivalence (Hardy and Littlewood did GRH for the character mod 4 implies Chebyshev's conjecture). See Math. Zeitschrift 1 (1918), pp. 1-24 and 213-219.
              – KConrad
              8 hours ago












            • Sorry, brain fart on my end—it was indeed Landau. Thanks @KConrad
              – Greg Martin
              3 hours ago
















            12














            Chebyshev made the following assertion, which is interpreted as saying that there are more primes of the form $4n+3$ than of the form $4n+1$:
            $$
            lim_{xtoinfty} sum_{pge3} (-1)^{(p-1)/2} e^{-p/x} = -infty.
            $$
            It was proved by Hardy/Littlewood and Landau that this assertion is equivalent to the generalized Riemann hypothesis for the Dirichlet $L$-function
            $$
            L(s,chi_{-4}) = 1 - 3^{-s} + 5^{-s} - 7^{-s} + 9^{-s} - 11^{-s} + cdots
            $$
            corresponding to the nonprincipal character (mod 4).




            • G. H. Hardy and J. E. Littlewood, Contributions to the theory of the Riemann zeta-function and the theory of the distribution of primes, Acta Math. 41 (1916), no. 1, 119–196

            • E. Landau, Über einige ältere Vermutungen und Behauptungen in der Primzahltheorie, Math. Z. 1 (1918), 1–24






            share|cite|improve this answer



















            • 1




              What was the paper of Ingham? I only knew that Landau in 1918 had shown the equivalence (Hardy and Littlewood did GRH for the character mod 4 implies Chebyshev's conjecture). See Math. Zeitschrift 1 (1918), pp. 1-24 and 213-219.
              – KConrad
              8 hours ago












            • Sorry, brain fart on my end—it was indeed Landau. Thanks @KConrad
              – Greg Martin
              3 hours ago














            12












            12








            12






            Chebyshev made the following assertion, which is interpreted as saying that there are more primes of the form $4n+3$ than of the form $4n+1$:
            $$
            lim_{xtoinfty} sum_{pge3} (-1)^{(p-1)/2} e^{-p/x} = -infty.
            $$
            It was proved by Hardy/Littlewood and Landau that this assertion is equivalent to the generalized Riemann hypothesis for the Dirichlet $L$-function
            $$
            L(s,chi_{-4}) = 1 - 3^{-s} + 5^{-s} - 7^{-s} + 9^{-s} - 11^{-s} + cdots
            $$
            corresponding to the nonprincipal character (mod 4).




            • G. H. Hardy and J. E. Littlewood, Contributions to the theory of the Riemann zeta-function and the theory of the distribution of primes, Acta Math. 41 (1916), no. 1, 119–196

            • E. Landau, Über einige ältere Vermutungen und Behauptungen in der Primzahltheorie, Math. Z. 1 (1918), 1–24






            share|cite|improve this answer














            Chebyshev made the following assertion, which is interpreted as saying that there are more primes of the form $4n+3$ than of the form $4n+1$:
            $$
            lim_{xtoinfty} sum_{pge3} (-1)^{(p-1)/2} e^{-p/x} = -infty.
            $$
            It was proved by Hardy/Littlewood and Landau that this assertion is equivalent to the generalized Riemann hypothesis for the Dirichlet $L$-function
            $$
            L(s,chi_{-4}) = 1 - 3^{-s} + 5^{-s} - 7^{-s} + 9^{-s} - 11^{-s} + cdots
            $$
            corresponding to the nonprincipal character (mod 4).




            • G. H. Hardy and J. E. Littlewood, Contributions to the theory of the Riemann zeta-function and the theory of the distribution of primes, Acta Math. 41 (1916), no. 1, 119–196

            • E. Landau, Über einige ältere Vermutungen und Behauptungen in der Primzahltheorie, Math. Z. 1 (1918), 1–24







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited 3 hours ago

























            answered 10 hours ago









            Greg Martin

            8,28813559




            8,28813559








            • 1




              What was the paper of Ingham? I only knew that Landau in 1918 had shown the equivalence (Hardy and Littlewood did GRH for the character mod 4 implies Chebyshev's conjecture). See Math. Zeitschrift 1 (1918), pp. 1-24 and 213-219.
              – KConrad
              8 hours ago












            • Sorry, brain fart on my end—it was indeed Landau. Thanks @KConrad
              – Greg Martin
              3 hours ago














            • 1




              What was the paper of Ingham? I only knew that Landau in 1918 had shown the equivalence (Hardy and Littlewood did GRH for the character mod 4 implies Chebyshev's conjecture). See Math. Zeitschrift 1 (1918), pp. 1-24 and 213-219.
              – KConrad
              8 hours ago












            • Sorry, brain fart on my end—it was indeed Landau. Thanks @KConrad
              – Greg Martin
              3 hours ago








            1




            1




            What was the paper of Ingham? I only knew that Landau in 1918 had shown the equivalence (Hardy and Littlewood did GRH for the character mod 4 implies Chebyshev's conjecture). See Math. Zeitschrift 1 (1918), pp. 1-24 and 213-219.
            – KConrad
            8 hours ago






            What was the paper of Ingham? I only knew that Landau in 1918 had shown the equivalence (Hardy and Littlewood did GRH for the character mod 4 implies Chebyshev's conjecture). See Math. Zeitschrift 1 (1918), pp. 1-24 and 213-219.
            – KConrad
            8 hours ago














            Sorry, brain fart on my end—it was indeed Landau. Thanks @KConrad
            – Greg Martin
            3 hours ago




            Sorry, brain fart on my end—it was indeed Landau. Thanks @KConrad
            – Greg Martin
            3 hours ago











            6














            Chebyshev's bias is consistent with the Riemann Hypothesis. I like Terry Tao's explanation in his blog:




            [..] the bias is small [..] and certainly consistent with known or conjectured positive results such as Dirichlet’s theorem or the generalised Riemann hypothesis. The reason for the Chebyshev bias can be traced back to the von Mangoldt explicit formula which relates the distribution of the von Mangoldt function ${Lambda}$ modulo ${q}$ with the zeroes of the ${L}$-functions with period ${q}$. This formula predicts (assuming some standard conjectures like GRH) that the von Mangoldt function ${Lambda}$ is quite unbiased modulo ${q}.$ The von Mangoldt function is mostly concentrated in the primes, but it also has a medium-sized contribution coming from squares of primes, which are of course all located in the quadratic residues modulo ${q}.$ (Cubes and higher powers of primes also make a small contribution, but these are quite negligible asymptotically.) To balance everything out, the contribution of the primes must then exhibit a small preference towards quadratic non-residues, and this is the Chebyshev bias.




            See also Rubinstein and Sarnak MR review here.






            share|cite|improve this answer


























              6














              Chebyshev's bias is consistent with the Riemann Hypothesis. I like Terry Tao's explanation in his blog:




              [..] the bias is small [..] and certainly consistent with known or conjectured positive results such as Dirichlet’s theorem or the generalised Riemann hypothesis. The reason for the Chebyshev bias can be traced back to the von Mangoldt explicit formula which relates the distribution of the von Mangoldt function ${Lambda}$ modulo ${q}$ with the zeroes of the ${L}$-functions with period ${q}$. This formula predicts (assuming some standard conjectures like GRH) that the von Mangoldt function ${Lambda}$ is quite unbiased modulo ${q}.$ The von Mangoldt function is mostly concentrated in the primes, but it also has a medium-sized contribution coming from squares of primes, which are of course all located in the quadratic residues modulo ${q}.$ (Cubes and higher powers of primes also make a small contribution, but these are quite negligible asymptotically.) To balance everything out, the contribution of the primes must then exhibit a small preference towards quadratic non-residues, and this is the Chebyshev bias.




              See also Rubinstein and Sarnak MR review here.






              share|cite|improve this answer
























                6












                6








                6






                Chebyshev's bias is consistent with the Riemann Hypothesis. I like Terry Tao's explanation in his blog:




                [..] the bias is small [..] and certainly consistent with known or conjectured positive results such as Dirichlet’s theorem or the generalised Riemann hypothesis. The reason for the Chebyshev bias can be traced back to the von Mangoldt explicit formula which relates the distribution of the von Mangoldt function ${Lambda}$ modulo ${q}$ with the zeroes of the ${L}$-functions with period ${q}$. This formula predicts (assuming some standard conjectures like GRH) that the von Mangoldt function ${Lambda}$ is quite unbiased modulo ${q}.$ The von Mangoldt function is mostly concentrated in the primes, but it also has a medium-sized contribution coming from squares of primes, which are of course all located in the quadratic residues modulo ${q}.$ (Cubes and higher powers of primes also make a small contribution, but these are quite negligible asymptotically.) To balance everything out, the contribution of the primes must then exhibit a small preference towards quadratic non-residues, and this is the Chebyshev bias.




                See also Rubinstein and Sarnak MR review here.






                share|cite|improve this answer












                Chebyshev's bias is consistent with the Riemann Hypothesis. I like Terry Tao's explanation in his blog:




                [..] the bias is small [..] and certainly consistent with known or conjectured positive results such as Dirichlet’s theorem or the generalised Riemann hypothesis. The reason for the Chebyshev bias can be traced back to the von Mangoldt explicit formula which relates the distribution of the von Mangoldt function ${Lambda}$ modulo ${q}$ with the zeroes of the ${L}$-functions with period ${q}$. This formula predicts (assuming some standard conjectures like GRH) that the von Mangoldt function ${Lambda}$ is quite unbiased modulo ${q}.$ The von Mangoldt function is mostly concentrated in the primes, but it also has a medium-sized contribution coming from squares of primes, which are of course all located in the quadratic residues modulo ${q}.$ (Cubes and higher powers of primes also make a small contribution, but these are quite negligible asymptotically.) To balance everything out, the contribution of the primes must then exhibit a small preference towards quadratic non-residues, and this is the Chebyshev bias.




                See also Rubinstein and Sarnak MR review here.







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered 14 hours ago









                kodlu

                3,56221627




                3,56221627






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to MathOverflow!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid …



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





                    Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                    Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid …



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f320102%2fchebyshevs-bias-conjecture-and-the-riemann-hypothesis%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    -

                    Popular posts from this blog

                    What visual should I use to simply compare current year value vs last year in Power BI desktop

                    Image
                    0 I have column SubToBind that shows current year ratio and column PY SubToBind which shows previous year ratio. How can I simply create a card that would be displaying them both in a nice way? Something like that: I cannot achieve that with regular card, I also tried Card with States by OKViz but also unable to see both values. In KPI visual - I dont like the word "Goal", it will confuse end users. Are there any cards or other visuals that would do the job? Thanks powerbi dax powerbi-embedded share | improve this question edited Jun 11 '18 at 20:11 Oleg
                    Read more

                    Alexandru Averescu

                    Image
                    Alexandre Averescu Alexandru Averescu Naissance 3 avril 1859 Babele, Ismail  (ro) près de Izmaïl (principauté de Moldavie) Décès 2 octobre 1938 (à 79 ans) [ 1 ] Bucarest Origine   Roumanie Arme cavalerie Grade Maréchal Années de service 1901-1917 Commandement chef d'état-major général 2 e  armée 3 e  armée Groupe d'armée sud armée du Danube Conflits Guerre russo-turque de 1877-1878 Deuxième guerre balkanique Première Guerre mondiale Faits d'armes Bataille de Turtucaia/Tutrakan Bataille de Mărăști Distinctions Autres fonctions 3 fois président du Conseil des ministres ministre des Affaires étrangères ministre sans portefeuille conseiller de la Couronne modifier   Alexandre Averescu (en roumain : Alexandru Averescu .mw-parser-output .prononciation>a{background:url("//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8a/Loudspeaker.svg/11px-Loudspeaker.svg.png")center
                    Read more

                    Trompette piccolo

                    Image
                    Ne doit pas être confondu avec trompette de poche. Trompette piccolo en si bémol, avec des branches d'embouchure différentes pour le si bémol (la plus courte) ou la (la plus longue) Trompette piccolo La trompette piccolo est la plus petite de la famille des trompettes. Elle joue une octave plus haut que la trompette standard en si bémol. La plupart des trompettes piccolo sont conçues pour jouer dans les deux tonalités de si bémol ou la, en utilisant une branche d'embouchure différente pour chaque tonalité. Le tube de la trompette piccolo en si bémol a une longueur moitié de celle de la trompette normale en si bémol. Des trompettes piccolo en sol, fa, ut sont également fabriquées, mais elles sont rares. La trompette soprano en ré, aussi connu comme la « trompette Bach », a été inventée vers 1890 par le facteur belge Victor-Charles Mahillon pour jouer les parties hautes de la trompette dans la musique de Bach et Haendel. La trompette piccolo moderne permet aux
                    Read more