![Arxiv:1705.00853V2 [Math.NT] 22 Jun 2017 Edsusterezmeans Riesz the Discuss We Ucin H ¨Bu Ucini Endby Defined Is M¨Obius Function the Function](http://data.docslib.org/img/5a5fc280483ca139357683444f86f429-1.webp)
arXiv:1705.00853v2 [math.NT] 22 Jun 2017 edsusteRezmeans Riesz the discuss We ucin h ¨bu ucini endby defined is M¨obius function The function. on for ss oe-ehlCnetr,Lna needneConje Independence Linear Conjecture, Mer Gonek-Hejhal Conjecture, Zero esis, Simple Hypothesis, Riemann Function, EAIN MN OECNETRSO H M THE ON CONJECTURES SOME AMONG RELATIONS edfietesmaoyfunction summatory the define We 2010 ti elkonta h rgnlMrescnetr states conjecture Mertens original the that known well is It e od n phrases. and words Key x τ . ≥ ahmtc ujc Classification. Subject Mathematics lct fzrs lo eoti nepii oml for formula explicit an obtain we Also, zeros. of plicity esuytema values mean the study we e rbe.I skonta h assertion the that known is It problem. mer ipiiyo eo.Nx,w osdrtelte rbe.M problem. latter estimate the the eas consider that we seems lieve Next, which zeros. condition, of sufficient simplicity which a gives in also conjecture, conjecture a propose we formula, ipiiyo eo hti ekrta h bv seto i assertion above the However, than weaker is zeros. that s of mean another zeros simplicity consider of we the simplicity difficult.Therefore, of presently is proof tion the for condition fti ae st osdrtooe rbesudrsm conj some simp are under zeta-function problems whether Riemann open that the two is of consider zeros problem all to whether is that paper this of n ow n htteuprbudwihi bandi hspap this in obtained is integ which estimation. this bound possible of upper best the Ω-result the that is have find also we We so and Hypothesis. Mertens weak ucinadtesmaoyfunction summatory the and function Abstract. M esis nti ae.W osdrbt ae when cases both consider We paper. this in 0 τ UCINADTEREANZETA-FUNCTION RIEMANN THE AND FUNCTION ( x R 1 µ = ) x M ( ( M n τ o ( = ) ( ( x u x ( + Γ(1 = ) ) edsustemlilct ftenntiilzrso h R the of zeros non-trivial the of multiplicity the discuss We 1 /u / 1. 2 ) log 2 du nrdcinadsaeeto results of statement and Introduction otherwise 0 ( if 1 ¨ bu ucin is eno nAihei ucin Rie Function, Arithmetic an of Mean Riesz M¨obius Function, − x M o o-eaiefixed non-negative a for ) ≪ 1) τ M τ ( k log x ) ( − R x := ) M 1 1 ) x x if P ( ≪ eoti h pe on of bound upper the obtain We . M x u ) n ( κ n n Γ( x u ≤ ≪ ) 1 x SH du / 1 = stepoutof product the is τ 2 µ rmr 12;Scnay11M06. Secondary 11M26; Primary 1 x ( M al,btti sntytdsrvd nti paper this In disproved. yet not is this but fails, 1) + T INOUE OTA ¯ o n real any for n 1 , / )(1 . M 2 ( x 1 od rnt is,w osdrtefor- the consider we First, not. or holds ( := ) − n x X ≤ fteMoisfnto.Tepurpose The M¨obius function. the of ) τ n x x ) τ sntfie,btdpnson depends but fixed, not is µ τ M P sasffiin odto o h sim- the for condition sufficient a is ecnld htteassertion the that conclude We . ( κ n ( cture. n x ne h ekMresHypoth- Mertens weak the under ) ≤ esHptei,Wa etn Hypoth- Mertens Weak Hypothesis, tens = ) x τ 1 k µ scntn n when and constant is − ( o ieetprimes different M n ( ffiin odto o the for condition ufficient x ,where ), n x n ahmtcasbe- mathematicians any τ e oapoc,frthe for approach, to ier 1 ( / x 2 em fteRiesz the of terms n R eo o.Teother The not. or le τ .B bevn the observing By ). log 1 x a unconditionally, ral rvn hsasser- this proving that M ro hsintegral this of er x u cue.Oeis One ectures. ( κ sasufficient a is ) u ) µ du eanzeta- iemann ( n ne the under steM¨obius the is ) , x This . OBIUS ¨ τ anZeta- mann depends 2 S. INOUE
(1.1) M(x) x1/2 | |≤ for x 1. However, this conjecture (1.1) was disproved by A. M. Odlyzko and H. J. J. te≥ Riele in [15]. Recently, D. G. Best and T. S. Trudgian [2] disproved that M(x) < cx1/2 for c< 1.6383. Many mathematicians believe that even | | (1.2) M(x) x1/2 ≪ fails, but this is as yet unproved. The following fact is a crucial reason why many mathematicians believe that the inequality (1.2) is false. Fact 1. If the Linear Independence Conjecture is true, then the inequality (1.2) is false. The Fact 1 was shown by A. E. Ingham [11] in 1942. We note that the Linear Independence Conjecture is the following conjecture. Conjecture 1 (The Linear Independence Conjecture). Assume that the Riemann zeta- function ζ(s) satisfies the Riemann Hypothesis. Then the positive ordinates of distinct zeros are linearly independent over Q. The summatory function M(x) is important in the study of prime numbers. Actu- ally, the Riemann Hypothesis is equivalent to the inequality M(x) x1/2+ε for any positive ε, which is weaker than the inequality (1.2). ≪ 1 K. M. Bartz [1] showed the following explicit formula for M(x): 1 dm(ρ)−1 xs (1.3) M(x) = lim lim (s ρ)m(ρ) m(ρ)−1 Tν →∞ (m(ρ) 1)! s→ρ ds − sζ(s) |γX| 1/2 m−1 M(x)=Ω± x (log x) if ζ(s) has a zero of multiplicity m (see p. 467 in H. L. Montgomery and R. C. Vaughan [13]). First we discuss whether the claim that all zeros of the Riemann zeta-function are simple (we abbreviate this as (SZC)) is true or not. Today, many mathematicians believe that (SZC) is true and there are many works under (SZC). H. M. Bui and D. R. Heath-Brown [4] showed that the rate of simple zeros of Riemann zeta-function is larger than about 70.37% under the Riemann Hypothesis, and D. A. Goldston and S. M. Gonek [6] showed the upper bound m(ρ) 1 + o(1) log |γ| under the Riemann ≤ 2 log log |γ| Hypothesis. Our first result is the following theorem for the multiplicity of the zeros of ζ(s). 1The author cannot follow Bartz’s proof of (1.3). However, instead of Lemma 1 in the paper [1], if we use Lemma 1 in the present paper, it is possible to follow her proof. RELATIONSAMONGSOMECONJECTURES 3 Theorem 1. Assume the Riemann Hypothesis. If there exists a positive number τ 1/2 α satisfying Mτ (x)= o x (log x) , then the inequality m(ρ) < α + 1 holds for any non-trivial zero ρ of the Riemann zeta-function. This theorem is shown by considering the Ω-result on Mτ (x). The parameter τ is fixed in this theorem. However, the author believes that a similar result would hold for τ depending on x under the assumption of a certain upper bound of Mτ (x). In order to discuss such situation (see Proposition 1 below), we first prove the following explicit formula. Remark 1. In what follows, ε and δ denote any arbitrarily small positive numbers, not necessarily the same ones at each occurrence. Theorem 2. There exists a sequence T tending to infinity and satisfying { ν } 1 dm(ρ)−1 xs Γ(s) M (x) = lim lim (s ρ)m(ρ) τ m(ρ)−1 Tν →∞ (m(ρ) 1)! s→ρ ds − ζ(s) Γ(1 + τ + s) |γX| 1/2 m(ρ1)−1 Γ(ρ1) iγ1 Mτ (x) =2x (log x) m(ρ1)Re x ζ(m(ρ1))(ρ )Γ(1 + τ + ρ ) 1 1 m(ρ1)−2 2x1/2 m (ρ ) 1 + 1 − (log x)l (m(ρ1) 1)! l × − Xl=0 dm(ρ1)−1−l Γ(s) Re lim (s ρ )m(ρ1) xiγ1 m(ρ )−1−l 1 s→ρ1 ds 1 − ζ(s)Γ(1 + τ + s) ! 1 dm(ρ)−1 xs Γ(s) + lim lim (s ρ)m(ρ) m(ρ)−1 Tν →∞ (m(ρ) 1)! s→ρ ds − ζ(s) Γ(1 + τ + s) |γX| iγ1 1/2 m(ρ1)−1 x Γ(ρ1) =: 2x (log x) m(ρ1)Re + Yτ,ρ1 (x), ζ(m(ρ1))(ρ )Γ(1 + τ + ρ ) 1 1 say. We believe that the first term of the right-hand side of the above formula dominates the behavior of Mτ (x). We propose the following conjecture. Conjecture 2. Let ρ be any non-trivial zeros of the Riemann zeta-function. For any monotone positive valued function τ = τ(x), we have 1/2 m(ρ)−1 −τ−1 Mτ (x)=Ω x (log x) (τ/e) . We can obtain the following result under Conjecture 2. Proposition 1. Assume Conjecture 2. If there exists a monotone positive valued function τ = τ(x) log log x (α + o(1)) satisfying M (x) x1/2(log x)β, then the ≤ log log log x τ ≪ inequality m(ρ) α + β + 1 ≤ holds for any non-trivial zero ρ of the Riemann zeta-function. In particular, if α + β < 1, then (SZC) holds. Now, we can obtain the following result on the bound of Mτ (x) under the Riemann Hypothesis. Theorem 3. Assume the Riemann Hypothesis. Then there exists a positive constant C0 > 0 such that M (x) x1/2 τ ≪ holds for any τ = τ(x) C0 log log x . ≥ log log log log x In view of this theorem, it is important to study Mτ (x) in the case when τ depends on x. Note that, however, the study of Mτ (x) for fixed τ is also not worthless. By Theorem 1/2 1, we see that whether Mτ (x) = o(x log x) holds or not is crucial to prove (SZC), 1/2 and in this paper, actually a stronger assertion Mτ (x) x holds for any τ > 1/2 under certain two situations; one is the situation where≪ Gonek-Hejhal Conjecture and the Riemann Hypothesis hold, and the other is the situation where the weak Mertens Hypothesis holds. Next, we study the Riesz mean Mτ (x) more closely by the explicit formula in The- orem 2. If (SZC) is true, then we have ∞ xρ Γ(ρ) xs Γ(s) Mτ (x) = lim ′ + Res Tν →∞ ζ (ρ) Γ(1 + τ + ρ) s=−l ζ(s) Γ(1 + s + τ) |γX| RELATIONSAMONGSOMECONJECTURES 5 for any λ> 3 under (SZC). − 2 From the viewpoints different from each other, Gonek [7] and Hejhal [9] indepen- dently suggested this conjecture. In fact, J0(T ) = N(T ) T log T (see Lemma 5 in this paper), and Gonek [7] showed ≍ (1.4) J (T ) T. −1 ≫ In addition, he suggested the asymptotic formula 3 (1.5) J (T ) T. −1 ∼ π3 Moreover, from the view point of the theory of random matrices, C. P. Hughes, J. P. Keating and N. O’Connell [10] suggested that, for λ> 3/2, we have − 2 G2(λ + 2) T T (λ+1) (1.6) J (T ) a log , λ ∼ G(2λ + 3) λ 2π 2π where 2 ∞ 1 λ Γ(m + λ) 2 a = 1 p−m , λ − p m!Γ(λ) p m=0 ! Y X and G is Barnes’ function defined by ∞ 1 z n 2 G(z + 1) = (2π)z/2 exp (z2 + γz2 + z) 1+ e−z+z /2n . −2 n nY=1 Here γ denotes Euler’s constant. Hence we may say that Conjecture 3 is supported from various points of view. We can obtain the following corollary by assuming the Riemann Hypothesis and Conjecture 3 at λ = 1. − Corollary 1. We assume the Riemann Hypothesis. If J−1(T ) T holds, then we have ≪ x1/2 if 1 τ(x), ≪ 1/2 3/2 −1 Mτ (x) x /τ if (log x) τ(x)= o(1), ≪ ≪ x1/2(log x)3/2 if 0 τ(x)= o (log x)−1 ≤ for any positive number x> 2. The case τ 0 of Corollary 1 is also the same as Theorem 1 (i) in N. Ng’s paper ≡ [14]. We obtain the result analogous to the inequality (1.2) for Mτ (x) when τ 1 by Corollary 1. Furthermore, if the above assumption J (T ) T is replaced by≫ the −1 ≪ assumption J (T ) T (log T )1/4, then we have −1/2 ≪ x1/2 if 1 τ(x), ≪ 1/2 5/4 −1 Mτ (x) x /τ if (log x) τ(x)= o(1), ≪ ≪ x1/2(log x)5/4 if 0 τ(x)= o (log x)−1 . ≤ The case τ 0 of the above result is mentioned by Ng [14]. Also, we≡ consider the following conjecture: 6 S. INOUE Conjecture 4 (The weak Mertens Hypothesis). x M(u) 2 (1.7) du log x. u ≪ Z1 E. C. Titchmarsh carefully discussed various fascinating facts under this conjecture in [18, Section 14. 28]. For example, Conjecture 4 implies that the Riemann Hypothesis 1 and (SZC) are true, and that is convergent. ρζ′(ρ) 2 ρ X | | Also, Ng [14] showed that the Riemann Hypothesis and J−1(T ) T imply the weak Mertens Hypothesis. Moreover, he proved that the Riemann≪ Hypothesis and J (T ) T imply −1 ≪ x M(u) 2 1 (1.8) du log x . u ∼ ρζ′(ρ) 2 1 γ Z X | | Now, we obtain the following results under Conjecture 4. Corollary 2. We assume the weak Mertens Hypothesis. Let τ > 1/2 be a real number. Then, we have iγ ∞ s 1/2 x Γ(ρ) x Γ(s) Mτ (x)= x + Res , ζ′(ρ) Γ(ρ + τ + 1) s=−l ζ(s) Γ(1 + τ + s) γ X Xl=0 and the series in the first term is uniformly and absolutely convergent with respect to x (0, ). In particular, we have ∈ ∞ M (x) x1/2 τ ≪ε for any τ 1/2+ ε. ≥ This corollary implies the inequality, which is analogous to the inequality (1.2) for Mτ (x) with τ > 1/2 under the weak Mertens Hypothesis. The Riesz mean has the recurrence formula x τ−1 τ u Mτ−1(u)du = x Mτ (x) Z1 for τ 1. Thus we can study the integral of M(x) by Mτ (x). The following results are under≥ this principle. Let A(s) be defined by ∞ 10s 12 2( 1)l(2l 2)!(2π)2l (1.9) A(s)= − + s − − s 1 (2l)! 2 (2l + s 1) ζ(2l + 1) − Xl=1 { } − 1 s . − ζ′(ρ)ρ(ρ + 1)(ρ s + 1) γ X − Now, we obtain the following result, which gives an improvement on a result of Ng [14] (see the remark after Corollary 4). Corollary 3. Assume the weak Mertens Hypothesis and let κ be a real number. Then, we have x M(u) xiγ du = x3/2−κ + E (x), uκ ζ′(ρ)ρ(ρ + 1 κ) κ 1 γ Z X − RELATIONSAMONGSOMECONJECTURES 7 where A(κ)+ O x1−κ if 1 < κ, Eκ(x)= O(log x) if κ = 1, O(x1−κ) if κ< 1. 1 Moreover, under the weak Mertens Hypothesis, for any κ> 2 we have 1 (1.10) = κA(κ + 1), ζ(κ) and for any κ 3 ≤ 2 x M(u) (1.11) du x3/2−κ. uκ ≪ Z1 We were able to obtain the equation (1.10), which express 1/ζ(s) by the sum over the non-trivial zeros of ζ(s) under the weak Mertens Hypothesis. Also, this equation holds even if κ is any complex number by analytic continuation, or we obtain the following corollary as an explicit formula of 1/ζ(s) on C. Corollary 4. Assume the weak Mertens Hypothesis. We have ∞ 1 2( 1)l(2l 2)!(2π)2l =10s 2+ s(s + 1) − − ζ(s) − (2l)! 2 (2l + s) ζ(2l + 1) Xl=1 { } 1 s(s + 1) − ζ′(ρ)ρ(ρ + 1)(ρ s) γ X − for s C, and these two series are absolutely and uniformly convergent in any compact subset∈K C, which does not contain a zero of ζ(s). ⊂ Thanks to this result, we can represent the special values ζ(2n + 1) by the sum over the non-trivial zeros of ζ(s) and the other special values ζ(2m + 1). For example, ∞ 1 2( 1)l(2l 2)!(2π)2l 1 =28 + 12 − − 12 , ζ(3) (2l)! 2(2l + 3)ζ(2l + 1) − ζ′(ρ)ρ(ρ + 1)(ρ 3) γ Xl=1 { } X − ∞ 1 2( 1)l(2l 2)!(2π)2l 1 =48 + 30 − − 30 ζ(5) (2l)! 2 (2l + 5) ζ(2l + 1) − ζ′(ρ)ρ(ρ + 1)(ρ 5) γ Xl=1 { } X − hold under the weak Mertens Hypothesis. Here we remark on the upper bound of (1.11). We can easily find that 1/2 x M(u) x M(u) 2 x du 1/2 du du uκ ≤ u u2κ−2 Z1 Z1 ! Z1 log x if κ = 3/2, (1.12) 3/2−κ 1/2 ≪ ( x (log x) if κ< 3/2 as a simple consequence of the weak Mertens Hypothesis. If κ = 3/2, a better estimate x M(u) du = o(log x) u3/2 Z1 8 S. INOUE than (1.12), which is equivalent to the formula (19) in [14], is known under the Riemann Hypothesis and J (T ) T . We have succeeded in obtaining the sharper estimate −1 ≪ (1.11) by calculating the explicit formula for Mτ (x). In addition, we can find that the estimate (1.11) is the best possible upper bound by the following theorem. Theorem 4. For any κ 3/2, ≤ x M(u) 2 du =Ω x3/2−κ uκ − ζ(1/2) ± Z1 2 holds unconditionally, and the term ζ(1/2) is missing unless κ = 3/2. In particular, we have ∞ M(x) (1.13) | |dx = . x3/2 ∞ Z1 Remark 2. We can show (1.13) more easily since the Riemann zeta-function has a zero in the vertical strip 1 σ 1. 2 ≤ ≤ On the other hand, we have x M(u) (1.14) | |du log x u3/2 ≪ Z1 under the weak Mertens Hypothesis by (1.12). Ng [14] obtained an estimate for the logarithmic density 1 dt δ(S) := lim X→∞ log X t Z[2,X]∩S of the set S = x 1 M(x) √x . He showed that { ≥ | | |≤ } (1.15) 0 < δ(S) < 1 under the Riemann Hypothesis, the Linear Independence Conjecture, 1 1 1 (log T )5/4 and . ρζ′(ρ) ≍ ρζ′(ρ) 2 ≍ T 0<γ 2. Auxiliary Lemmas Let s = σ + it be a complex variable with σ and t being real. 10 S. INOUE Lemma 1. Let T > 0 be a sufficiently large positive number and H = T 1/3. Then we have min max ζ(σ + it) −1 exp C(log log T )2 T ≤t≤T +H 1 | | ≤ 2 ≤σ≤2 with an absolute constant C > 0. In particular, there exists a real number T∗ [T, T + T 1/3] such that ∈ 1 1 T ε σ 2 ζ(σ + iT ) ≪ ∗ 2 ≤ ≤ ∗ for any ε> 0. Proof. The proof of this lemma is given in [17, Theorem 2]. Lemma 2. Assume the Riemann Hypothesis. There exists an absolute constant C > 0 such that 1 C log t e 1 1 1 exp log , <σ + ζ(s) ≤ log log t (σ 1/2) log log t 2 ≤ 2 log log t | | − for t 5. | |≥ Proof. This lemma is given in [13, Theorem 13. 23]. 1 Lemma 3. For any sufficiently large t > T0 and σ < 2 , we have 1 σ (2.1) ζ(s) s 1/2−σ(2πe)σ exp t tan−1 − ζ(1 s). ≍ | | t − If t T and σ = (2m + 1)/2 with m Z , we have ≤ 0 − ∈ >0 2πe σ (2.2) ζ(s) σ 1/2 ζ(1 s). ≍ | | σ − | | Proof. This lemma follows from the functional equation ζ(s) = χ(s)ζ(1 s) with χ(s) = 2(2π)s−1Γ(1 s)sin πs and the Stirling formula. − − 2 Lemma 4. Let τ > 0 and x > 0 be real numbers, a(n) be an arithmetical function, ∞ a(n) α(s) = n=1 ns and σ0 > max 0,σa with the abscissa of absolute convergence σa for Dirichlet series α(s). Define: { } P 1 n τ C (x) := a(n) 1 . τ Γ(τ + 1) − x nX≤x Then, for any sufficiently large number T > 0, we obtain 1 σ0+iT xsΓ(s) C (x)= α(s) ds + R, τ 2πi Γ(1 + τ + s) Zσ0−iT where ∞ xσ0 a(n) xσ0 a(n) (x/n)−(T −σ0) x (2.3) R 1+τ | σ | + τ | σ | min 1+ , ≪T n 0 T n 0 ( τ T x n ) nX=1 x/2X Proof. When max σ, t is sufficiently large and σ is non-negative real number, then we have { | |} Γ(s) (2.4) (σ2 + t2)−(1+τ)/2 Γ(1 + τ + s) ≪ by the Stirling formula. By the Stirling formula and Γ(z)Γ(1 z)= π/ sin πz, we also have (2.4) when t is any real number and σ = (2n + 1)/2 is negative− half-integer with − n Z>0, or t> 0 is any sufficiently large and σ is any negative number. ∈Now, we are going to give the following estimate: 1 σ0+iT Γ(s) (2.5) ys ds 2πi Γ(1 + τ + s) Zσ0−iT 1 O yσ0 /T 1+τ if 0 1 σ0+iT Γ(s) 1 σ0+iT K+iT K−iT Γ(s) ys ds = + + ys ds 2πi Γ(1 + τ + s) 2πi Γ(1 + τ + s) Zσ0−iT ZK+iT ZK−iT Zσ0−iT =: I1 + I2 + I3, say. We get T −(1+τ)/2 I yK K2 + t2 dt yKK−1−τ T. | 2|≪ ≪ Z−T When K , the last term goes to zero. For 0 On the other hand, for 0 Therefore, for 0 ∞ ∞ −1 τ Γ(s) n 1 1 y Res ys = y−1 = − . s=−n Γ(1 + τ + s) − Γ(1 + τ n)n! Γ(1 + τ) n=0 n=0 − X X RELATIONSAMONGSOMECONJECTURES 13 From the above argument, we obtain the estimate 1 σ0+iT Γ(s) α(s)xs ds 2πi Γ(1 + τ + s) Zσ0−iT 1 σ0+iT x s Γ(s) = + a(n) ds 2πi n Γ(1 + τ + s) n>x σ0−iT nX≤x X Z 1 n τ = a(n) 1 R, Γ(1 + τ) − x − nX≤x where we can find that R satisfies the inequality (2.3). Lemma 5. Let N(T ) be the number of non-trivial zeros ρ = β + iγ of the Riemann zeta-function with 0 < γ T counted with multiplicity. Then we have ≤ 1 1 + log 2π N(T )= T log T T + O (log T ) . 2π − 2π Proof. The proof is given in [13, Corollary 14. 4]. 3. Proofs of Theorems 1, 2 and 3 First, we have to show the following Lemma. Theorem 1 is immediate consequence of this lemma. 1 Lemma 6. Assume the Riemann Hypothesis. Let ρ = 2 + iγ be a non-trivial zero of the Riemann zeta-function, m(ρ) be the multiplicity of ρ and τ be a positive real number. We have 1/2 m(ρ)−1 Mτ (x)=Ω± x (log x) . The author prove this lemma by using the idea in Section 15.1 in [13]. Proof. Let τ be a positive number and c> 0 be an absolute constant such that M (x) τ ≤ cx1/2(log x)m(ρ)−1 for any x K . We define ≥ 0 ∞ M (x) cx1/2(log x)m(ρ)−1 G (s) := τ − dx. τ xs+1 Z1 Γ(s) By Lemma 4, Mτ (x) is expressed by the Mellin inversion transform of ζ(s)Γ(1+τ+s) as follows: 1 σ0+i∞ xs Γ(s) (3.1) M (x)= ds τ 2πi ζ(s) Γ(1 + τ + s) Zσ0−i∞ 1/2+ε for σ0 > 1. On the other hand, we can prove that the inequality Mτ (x) x holds for any τ 0 under the Riemann Hypothesis by using Lemma 4 in≪ the same way as in the proof≥ of M(x) x1/2+ε, which is given in [18, Theorem 14.25]. Hence, for σ> 1/2, we have ≪ Γ(s) c(m(ρ) 1)! (3.2) Gτ (s)= − ζ(s)Γ(1 + τ + s) − (s 1/2)m(ρ) − by the assumption of the Riemann Hypothesis, equation (3.1) and the Mellin transform. 14 S. INOUE Next, we define ∞ M (x) cx1/2(log x)m(ρ)−1 I (s) := τ − (1 + cos(φ γ log x))dx, τ xs+1 − Z1 where φ is any real number. Then we have 1 (3.3) I (s)= G (s)+ eiφG (s + iγ)+ e−iφG (s iγ) τ τ 2 τ τ − 1 iφ −iγ −iφ iγ from the equation cos(φ iγ log x)= 2 e x + e x . We can find that I (σ)− does not tend to + as σ 1/2 + 0 for any real φ from the τ ∞ → above integral representation of Iτ (s). Hence we have m(ρ) lim sup (σ 1/2) Iτ (σ) 0. σ→1/2+0 − ≤ On the other hand, by (3.2) and (3.3), we have m(ρ) iφ Γ(ρ)(m(ρ))! lim (σ 1/2) Iτ (σ)= c(m(ρ) 1)! + Re e . σ→1/2+0 − − − Γ(1 + τ + ρ)ζ(m(ρ))(ρ) Thus we have m(ρ) Γ(ρ) 0 < | | c, Γ(1 + τ + ρ)ζ(m(ρ))(ρ) ≤ Γ(1+τ+ρ)ζ(m (ρ))(ρ) if we take φ = arg Γ(ρ) . Hence we have 1/2 m(ρ)−1 Mτ (x)=Ω+ x (log x) . Similarly, we have 1/2 m(ρ)−1 Mτ (x)=Ω− x (log x) , which completes the proof of Lemma 6. Proof of Theorem 2. Let τ be a positive number and L = (2m + 1)/2 with m Z>0. By Lemma 4, we have ∈ 1 2+iT∗ xs Γ(s) x2 M (x)= ds + O , τ 2πi ζ(s) Γ(1 + τ + s) τT τ Z2−iT∗ ∗ where T∗ satisfies the condition in Lemma 1. By the residue theorem, we find that 1 2+iT∗ xs Γ(s) ds 2πi ζ(s) Γ(1 + τ + s) Z2−iT∗ 1 2+iT∗ −L+iT∗ −L−iT∗ xs Γ(s) = + + ds 2πi ζ(s) Γ(1 + τ + s) Z−L+iT Z−L−iT∗ Z2−iT∗ xs Γ(s) xs Γ(s) + Res + Res s=ρ ζ(s) Γ(1 + τ + s) s=−l ζ(s) Γ(1 + τ + s) |γX| x−L+it Γ( L + it) + − dt , T0<|t|≤T∗ ζ( L + it) Γ(1 + τ L + it) Z − − where T0 > 1 is a sufficiently large constant. By the inequality (2.4) and the asymptotic formula (2.2) in Lemma 3, we have x−L+it Γ( L + it) (x/2πe)−L dt . − L+3/2+τ |t|≤T0 ζ( L + it) Γ(1 + τ L + it) ≪ L Z − − The right-hand side tends to zero as L . By the inequality (2.4) and the asymp- totic formula (2.1) in Lemma 3, we also→∞ have −L+it −L x Γ( L + it) (x/2πe) −1/2−L − dt 1+τ t dt T0<|t|≤T∗ ζ( L + it) Γ(1 + τ L + it) ≪ L T0<|t|≤T∗ Z − − Z −L (x/2πe) . ≪ 2+τ L−1/2 L T0 The last term tends to zero as L . Hence we obtain →∞ lim J2 = 0. L→∞ Next, we evaluate the integral along one of the horizontal lines. One notes that 2+iT∗ 1/2+iT∗ iT∗ xs Γ(s) J = + + ds 1 ζ(s) Γ(1 + τ + s) Z1/2+iT∗ ZiT∗ Z−L+iT∗ ! ′ ′′ ′′′ =: J1 + J1 + J1 . By Lemma 1 and (2.4), we have 2 x2T −1−τ+ε J ′ xσT −1−τ+εdσ ∗ . | 1 |≪ ∗ ≪ log x Z1/2 16 S. INOUE Using Lemma 1, (2.1) and (2.4), we find that 1/2 1/2 ′′ 1 σ x J1 (xT∗) dσ . | |≪ T 3/2+τ−ε ≪ T 1+τ−ε log x ∗ Z0 ∗ By (2.1) and (2.4), one has 0 −L ′′′ 1 σ 1 (xT∗) 1 J1 (xT∗) dσ − . | |≪ T 3/2+τ−ε ≪ T 3/2+τ−ε log(xT ) ≪ T 3/2+τ−ε log xT ∗ Z−L ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ Hence we have x2T −1−τ+ε J ∗ . 1 ≪ log x Similarly, we have x2T −1−τ+ε J ∗ 3 ≪ log x by the Schwarz reflection principle. From the above argument, we obtain m(ρ)−1 s 1 d m(ρ) x Γ(s) (3.4) Mτ (x)= lim (s ρ) (m(ρ) 1)! s→ρ dsm(ρ)−1 − ζ(s) Γ(1 + τ + s) |γX| 1+1/ log x+iT∗ s x Γ(s) ε−τ L1 = ds xT∗ . | | σ0+iT∗ ζ(s) Γ(1 + τ + s) ≪ Z Similarly, we have 1+1/ log x−iT∗ s x Γ(s) ε−τ L3 = ds xT . | | σ0−iT∗ ζ(s) Γ(1 + τ + s) ≪ Z We split the following integral into three parts: xσ0+it Γ(σ + it) L = + + 0 dt. 2 ζ(σ + it) Γ(1 + τ + σ + it) Z|t|≤14 Z14<|t|≤log log T Zlog log T<|t|≤T∗ ! 0 0 We observe xσ0+it Γ(σ (T )+ it) 0 ∗ dt x1/2 |t|≤14 ζ(σ0(T∗)+ it) Γ(1 + τ + σ0(T∗)+ it) ≪ Z Γ(s) since the function is continuous in the region 1/2 σ, t 14 under ζ(s)Γ(1 + τ + s) ≤ | |≤ the Riemann Hypothesis. By Lemma 2 and the Stirling formula, we have xσ0+it Γ(σ + it) 0 dt ζ(σ + it) Γ(1 + τ + σ + it) Z14<|t|≤log log T 0 0 1/2 C log t e log x −τ−1 x exp log τ dt ≪ log log t log log t Z14 1/2 C log t e log 2T −τ−1 x exp log t dt ≪ log log t log log t Zlog log T 4. Convergence of the residues series on negative integers In this section we supply a proof of a fact, which was remained pending in the preceding section. That is, we show that ∞ xs Γ(s) Res s=−l ζ(s) Γ(s + τ + 1) Xl=1 is absolutely and uniformly convergent. First, we show the convergence in the case of non-integer τ. When l is an odd integer, we have xs Γ(s) x−2n+1 Res = , s=−2n+1 ζ(s) Γ(1 + τ + s) −ζ( 2n + 1)Γ( 2n +2+ τ)(2n 1)! − − − and ζ( 2n + 1) = 2( 1)n(2π)−2n(2n 1)!ζ(2n), − − − 1 Γ( 2n +2+ τ)= . − sin(πτ)Γ(2n 1 τ) − − Hence we have ∞ xs Γ(s) Res x−1 s=−2n+1 ζ(s) Γ(1 + τ + s) ≪ n=1 X and this series is absolutely and uniformly convergent. When n is even, we have xs Γ(s) Res s=−2n ζ(s) Γ(1 + τ + s) d xs Γ(s) = lim (s + 2n)2 s→−2n ds ζ(s) Γ(1 + τ + s) (s + 2n)xsΓ(s) ζ′(s) Γ′(s) = lim 2 (s + 2n) + (s + 2n) s→−2n ζ(s)Γ(1 + τ + s) − ζ(s) Γ(s) x−2n Γ′(1 + τ 2n) + log x − ζ′( 2n)Γ(1 + τ 2n)(2n)! − Γ(1 + τ 2n) − − − x−2n ζ′′( 2n) Γ′(1 + τ 2n) = log x − + c (2n)! − , ζ′( 2n)Γ(1 + τ 2n)(2n)! − 2ζ′( 2n) 2n − Γ(1 + τ 2n) − − − − where c2n is the 0-th coefficient of the Laurent expansion of the gamma-function at 2n. Now, we find that − (4.1) ζ′( 2n) = ( 1)n(2π)−2n(2n)!ζ(2n + 1)/2, − − π 2 Γ′(2n + 1) ζ′(2n + 1) (4.2) ζ′′( 2n)= 2ζ′( 2n) + log 2π − − − 2 − Γ(2n + 1) − ζ(2n + 1) (s + 2n)ζ′(s) ζ(s) from ζ(s)= χ(s)ζ(1 s) and ζ′′( 2n) = 2 lim − . − − s→−2n (s + 2n)2 By (4.1) and (4.2), we have ζ′′( 2n) π 2 Γ′(2n + 1) ζ′(2n + 1) − = 2 + log 2π . ζ′( 2n) − 2 − Γ(2n + 1) − ζ(2n + 1) − RELATIONSAMONGSOMECONJECTURES 19 Using the functional equation Γ(s)Γ(1 s)= π/ sin πs, we find that − Γ′(1 + τ 2n) Γ(2n τ) − = − Γ′(2n τ). Γ(1 + τ 2n) tan π(1 + τ) − − − On the other hand, we have c2n =0 by 1 c2n = lim Γ(s) and Γ(s)Γ(1 s)= π/ sin πs. s→−2n − (2n)!(s + 2n) − Hence we obtain ∞ xs Γ(s) Res x−2 log x, s=−2n ζ(s) Γ(1 + τ + s) ≪ n=1 X and this series is absolutely and uniformly convergent. Similarly, when τ = k is a positive integer, we obtain ∞ xs Γ(s) (4.3) Res s=−l ζ(s) Γ(1 + τ + s) Xl=0 2( 1)l+k+1(2l k 1)! x −2l 2 = − − − (2l!)2ζ(2l + 1) 2π − k! l> k X2 2 log x(x/2π)−2l 2ζ′′( 2l)(x/4π2)−2l + − (2l!)2(k 2l)!ζ(2l + 1) − (2l!)3(k 2l)! (ζ(2l + 1))2 0 5. Proofs of Corollaries 1, 2 and 3 Proof of Corollary 1. First, we show this corollary in the case τ 1. Using equation (3.4), we find that ≫ iγ ∞ s x Γ(ρ) 1/2 x Γ(s) Mτ (x)= x + Res ζ′(ρ) Γ(1 + τ + ρ) s=−l ζ(s) Γ(1 + τ + s) |γX| iγ ∞ s x Γ(ρ) 1/2 x Γ(s) Mτ (x)= x + Res ζ′(ρ) Γ(1 + τ + ρ) s=−l ζ(s) Γ(1 + τ + s) |γX| iγ 1 if 1 τ, x Γ(ρ) −3/2 ≪ −1 ′ τ if (log x) τ = o(1), ζ (ρ) Γ(1 + τ + ρ) ≪ 3/2 ≪ −1 |γ| 1 1 1. ≤ ρζ′(ρ) 2 ρ 2τ ≪ε |γX|≤T | | |γX|≤T | | Hence the series xiγ Γ(ρ) ζ′(ρ) Γ(ρ + τ + 1) γ X is absolutely and uniformly convergent with respect to x (0, ). Therefore, we obtain Corollary 2 by Theorem 2. ∈ ∞ 22 S. INOUE Proof of Corollary 3. Assume the weak Mertens Hypothesis and let κ be a real number. Then we have x M(u) uM (u) x x M (u) du = 1 + κ 1 du uκ uκ uκ Z1 1 Z1 x M (u) = κ 1 du + x1−κM (x) uκ 1 Z1 x since 0 M(u)du = xM1(x). When κ> 1, we obtain ∞ Rx M (u) x uρ−κ Γ(ρ) x us Γ(s) du 1 du = du + Res uκ ζ′(ρ) Γ(ρ + 2) s=−l ζ(s) Γ(s + 2) uκ 1 1 γ 1 Z Z X Z Xl=0 ∞ xρ−κ+1 1 ∞ us Γ(s) du = − + Res + O x1−κ ζ′(ρ)(ρ κ + 1)ρ(ρ + 1) s=−l ζ(s) Γ(s + 2) uκ γ − Z1 l=0 X X by Corollary 2. Hence we have x M(u) xρ−κ+1 du = + A(κ)+ O x1−κ , uκ ζ′(ρ)ρ(ρ κ + 1) Z1 γ − X where ∞ ∞ us Γ(s) du 1 A(κ)= κ Res κ . s=−l ζ(s) Γ(s + 2) uκ − ζ′(ρ)(ρ κ + 1)ρ(ρ + 1) 1 γ Z Xl=0 X − Moreover, we find that ∞ 10κ 12 2( 1)l(2l 2)!(2π)2l A(κ)= − + κ − − κ 1 (2l)! 2 (2l + κ 1) ζ(2l + 1) − Xl=1 { } − 1 κ − ζ′(ρ)ρ(ρ + 1)(ρ κ + 1) γ X − by calculating the equation (4.3) in the case k = 1. The case κ 1 is similar. ≤ 6. Proofs of Theorems 4 and 5 We shall prove the following lemmas. Theorem 4 is immediate consequence of these Lemma 7 and Lemma 8. Lemma 7. Let Θ denote the supremum of real parts of the non-trivial zeros of the Riemann zeta-function and κ 3/2. Then we have ≤ x M(u) 2 du =Ω xΘ−κ+1−ε uκ − ζ(1/2) ± Z1 for any fixed number ε> 0, where the term 2/ζ(1/2) is missing unless κ = 3/2. Proof. We denote x M(u) 2 (6.1) H (x) := du , κ uκ − ζ(1/2) Z1 RELATIONSAMONGSOMECONJECTURES 23 where the term 2/ζ(1/2) is missing unless κ = 3/2. First we show the case κ < 3/2. Now, we suppose that there exists a number 0 < ε < 3/2 κ such that 0 − Θ−κ+1−ε0 (6.2) Hκ(x) Θ−1/2−ε0 H3/2(x) ∞ Θ−1/2+ε0 x H3/2(x) 1 1 2 − dx = . xs+1/2 s Θ+ ε − s(s 1/2)ζ(s) − (s 1/2)ζ(1/2) Z1 − 0 − − Hence we have the Ω-result Θ−1/2−ε H3/2(x)=Ω±(x ) by considered in the same manner as in the case κ< 3/2. Lemma 8. We assume the Riemann Hypothesis. Let ρ = 1/2+ iγ be a non-trivial zero of the Riemann zeta-function and τ 3/2. Then we have ≤ 1 x M(u) 2 1 lim sup κ du ′ , x→∞ x3/2−κ u − ζ(1/2) ≥ ρ(ρ κ + 1)ζ (ρ) Z1 | − | 1 x M(u) 2 1 lim inf du , x→∞ x3/2−κ uκ − ζ(1/2) ≤− ρ(ρ κ + 1)ζ′(ρ) Z1 | − | 1 where if ρ is a multiple zero, we consider as = + , and the term 2 is ργζ′(ρ) ∞ ζ(1/2) missing unless κ = 3/2. | | 24 S. INOUE Proof. Let s = σ + it be a complex number with σ > 1/2. Suppose that H (x) κ ≤ cx3/2−κ for all x X . We define ≥ 0 ∞ H (x) cx3/2−κ G (s) := κ − dx. κ xs+2−κ Z1 Using integrate by parts, we have 1 c (6.3) G (s)= κ s(s + 1 κ)ζ(s) − (s 1/2) − − 3/2−κ+ε 1/2+ε for σ > 1/2 because Hκ(x) x and M(x) x hold under the Riemann Hypothesis. Now, we define≪ that ≪ ∞ H (x) cx3/2−κ I (s) := κ − (1 + cos(φ γ log x))dx, κ xs+2−κ − Z1 where φ is any real number. Then we find that 1 (6.4) I (s)= G (s)+ eiφG (s + iγ)+ e−iφG (s iγ) . κ κ 2 κ κ − Now, we have (6.5) lim sup (σ 1/2)Iκ(σ) 0 σ→1/2+0 − ≤ for any real φ since lim sup Iκ(σ) =+ holds by the definition Iκ(s). But there exists σ→1/2+0 6 ∞ φ such that lim (σ 1/2)Iκ(σ)= σ→1/2+0 − ∞ 1 if ρ = 2 + iγ is a multiple zero of ζ(s). Hence if ζ(s) has a multiple zero, then we have lim sup Hκ(x)=+ . x→∞ ∞ Next we assume (SZC). Then, by (6.3) and (6.4), we have 2 eiφ lim (s 1/2)Iκ(s)= c + Re , s→1/2 − ζ(1/2) − ρ(ρ κ + 1)ζ′(ρ) − and if we take φ = arg(ρ(ρ κ + 1)ζ′(ρ)), we have − 2 1 c + 0 ζ(1/2) − ρ(ρ κ + 1)ζ′(ρ) ≤ | − | 2 3 by (6.5), where ζ(1/2) is missing unless κ = 2 . Hence we obtain 2 1 + c. ζ(1/2) ρ(ρ κ + 1)ζ′(ρ) ≤ | − | Hence we have Hκ(x) 2 1 lim sup + ′ , x→∞ x3/2−κ ≥ ζ(1/2) ρ(ρ κ + 1)ζ (ρ) | − | 2 3 where the term ζ(1/2) is missing unless κ = 2 . RELATIONSAMONGSOMECONJECTURES 25 Similarly, we have H (x) 2 1 lim inf κ , x→∞ x3/2−κ ≤ ζ(1/2) − ρ(ρ κ + 1)ζ′(ρ) | − | 2 3 where the term ζ(1/2) is missing unless κ = 2 . Proof of Theorem 5. By Lemma 8, we may assume (SZC). We denote x M(u) H (x) := du κ uκ Z1 ∞ H (x) cx3/2−κ G (s) := κ − dx κ xs+2−κ Z1 ∞ 3/2−κ K ∗ Hκ(x) cx Iκ (s) := s−+2−κ (1 + cos(φk γk log x))dx 1 x − Z kY=1 as in the previous section. Then we find that K 1 I ∗(s)= G (s)+ eiφk G (s + iγ )+ e−iφk G (s iγ ) + J (s) κ κ 2 κ k κ − k κ Xk=1 where Jκ(s) is a linear combination of Gκ at arguments of the form K s + i εkγk Xk=1 ′ with more than one of εk are non-zero. Assuming the Linear Independence Conjecture, we see that the function Jκ(s) does not have a pole at s = 1/2. Hence we have K iφk ∗ 2 e lim (s 1/2)Iκ (s)= c + Re ′ , s→1/2 − ζ(1/2) − ρk(ρk κ + 1)ζ (ρk) Xk=1 − 2 3 where the term ζ(1/2) is missing unless κ = 2 . Considering in the same manner as in the proof of Lemma 8, we have K 2 1 c + ′ 0 ζ(1/2) − ρk(ρk κ + 1)ζ (ρk) ≤ Xk=1 | − | if we take φ = arg(ρ (ρ κ + 1)ζ′(ρ )). Hence we have k k k − k 2 1 1 + c ζ(1/2) 2 ρ(ρ κ + 1)ζ′(ρ) ≤ γ X | − | since K is any positive integer. Similarly, we have inequality (1.17). Acknowledgments. The author expresses his gratitude to Prof. Kohji Matsumoto, Prof. Isao Kiuchi, Prof. Masatoshi Suzuki, Prof. Hirotaka Akatsuka, Prof. Sumaia Saad Eddin, Mr. Tomohiro Ikkai and Mr. Sohei Tateno for their helpful comments. 26 S. INOUE References [1] K. M. Bartz, On some complex explicit formulae connected with the M¨obius function. II, Acta Arith. LVII (1991), 295–305. [2] D. G. Best and T. S. Trudgian, Linear relations of zeroes of the zeta-function, Math. Comp. 84 (2015), 2047–2058. [3] H. M. Bui, S. M. Gonek and M. B. Milinovich, A hybrid Euler-Hadamard product and moments of ζ′(ρ), Forum Math. 27 (2015), 1799–1828. [4] H. M. Bui and D. R. Heath-Brown, On simple zeros of the Riemann zeta-function, Bull. London Math. Soc. 45 (2013), 953–961. [5] E. Carneiro, V. Chandee and M. B. Milinovich, Bounding S(t) and S1(t) on the Riemann hypoth- esis, Math. Ann. 356 (2013), no. 3, 939–968. [6] D. A. Goldston and S. M. Gonek, A note on S(t) and the zeros of the Riemann zeta-function, Bull. London Math. Soc. 39 (2007), 482–486. [7] S. M. Gonek, On negative moments of the Riemann zeta-function, Mathematika 36 (1989), 71–88. [8] S. M. Gonek, The second moment of the reciprocal of the Riemann zeta-function and its derivative, lecture given at MSRI, (1999), http://www.msri.org/publications/ln/msri/1999/random/gonek/. [9] D. Hejhal, On the distribution of log ζ′( 1 + it) , Number theory, trace formula and discrete groups 2 (ed. K. E. Aubert, E. Bombieri and D. Goldfeld, Academic Press, San Diego, 1989), 343–370. [10] C. P. Hughes, J. P. Keating and N. O’Connell, Random matrix theory and the derivative of the Riemann zeta-function, Proc. Roy. Soc. London Ser. A 456 (2000), 2611–2627. [11] A. E. Ingham, On two conjectures in the theory of numbers, Amer. J. Math. 64 (1942), 313–319. [12] H. L. Montgomery, The pair correlation of zeros of the zeta function, Analytic number theory, Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics 24 (American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1973), 181–193. [13] H. L. Montgomery and R. C. Vaughan, Multiplicative Number Theory I. Classical Theory, Cam- bridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, Cambridge University press, 2007. [14] N. Ng, The distribution of the summatory function of the M¨obius function, Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 89 (2004), 361–389. [15] A. M. Odlyzko and H. J. J. te Riele, Disproof of the Mertens conjecture, J. Reine Angew. Math. 357 (1984), 138–160. [16] A. M. Odlyzko, On the distribution of spacings between zeros of the zeta function, Math. Comp. 48 (1987), 273–308. [17] K. Ramachandra and A. Sankaranarayanan, Notes on the Riemann zeta-function, J. Indian Math. Soc. 57 (1991), 67–77. [18] E. C. Titchmarsh, The Theory of the Riemann Zeta-Function, Second Edition, Edited and with a preface by D. R. Heath–Brown, The Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, New York, 1986. Graduate School of Mathematics, Nagoya University, Furocho, Chikusaku, Nagoya 464-8602, Japan E-mail address: [email protected]