Closed rudolph-git-acc closed 5 years ago
Here's a composite visualisation of (1.58), (1.83), and (1.89) for N=[1000-1/4, 1000+1/4], w=N*u^2/(64*pi^2)=[0, 1/2]
:
Is the asymptotic behaviour clear enough now so that this github issue can be closed, or are there still theoretical approximations and numerical calculations or visualisations to make before we will have reached that point?
As far as I can see I think we've reached a satisfactory state of affairs with the "sharkfin" zeroes. At some point it might be worth writing this up as a relatively short paper for an experimental mathematics journal showing the numerical phenomena and the heuristic justifications of them, but we don't have to decide up on that now. I have a graduate student who is interested in making the heuristic calculations rigorous (for instance to make the complex zero phenomena rigorous enough that one can make an alternate proof of Newman's conjecture) but this would be separate from the Polymath project.
Rudolph: I don't know of any good way to identify at time zero which of the (presumably entirely real) zeroes of H_0 will survive to be one of the zeroes that stay real for all negative time. The fact that these zeroes exist do give some very weak information on H_0 but at this point I don't think we can say very much (unless there is an interesting new numerical phenomenon about them that demands some explanation). I did realise by the way that the original work of Polya had some work in this direction, in particular I think Polya was able to show that zeta had infinitely many zeroes on the critical line by working with something like H_t (will try to look into this more).
Agree, this seems indeed a good point to return from this 'surprisingly fishy' ;) subroutine and go back to the main thread. The exploration of the negative t
domain has sparked off a few more thoughts, but I will post them on the blog later.
Probably time to shift focus back to finishing the write-up. KM has continued progressing the Lemma-bound piece and the conditional computation results, so we should have good momentum.
Will formally close this issue tomorrow.
Grateful for any help to properly evaluate the sequence of equations on this Wiki page: http://michaelnielsen.org/polymath1/index.php?title=Polymath15_test_problem#Large_negative_values_of_.5Bmath.5Dt.5B.2Fmath.5D
Below is the pari/gp code I have used so far. At the end of the code is a simple rootfinder that should (approximately) find this sequence of roots:
however from eq 318 onwards it finds many more roots (also at different t, e.g. -100). Have experimented with the integral limits, the integral's fixed parameter, the real precision settings of pari and the size of the sums, but no success yet.
Have re-injected some of the non-zero multiplication factors that can be switched on/off if needed.
One thing I noticed is that after eq 307 the function doesn't seem to be real anymore (see data at the end). Not sure if this should matter though, since I use the real value of Ht for root finding.