DOCSLIB.ORG

An Invitation to Cauchy-Riemann and Sub-Riemannian Geometries John P

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
An Invitation to Cauchy-Riemann and Sub-Riemannian Geometries John P An Invitation to Cauchy-Riemann and Sub-Riemannian Geometries John P. D’Angelo and Jeremy T. Tyson certain amount of complex analysis, in both one and several variables, com- bines with some differential geometry to form the basis of research in diverse parts of mathematics. We first describe Athat foundation and then invite the reader to follow specific geometric paths based upon it. We discuss such topics as the failure of the Riemann mapping theorem in several variables, the geometry of real hypersurfaces in complex Euclidean space, the Heisenberg group, sub-Riemannian manifolds and their metric space structure, the Hopf fibration, sub-Riemannian geodesics on the three-sphere, CR mappings invariant under a finite group, and finite type conditions. All of these topics fall within the branch of mathematics described by the title, but of course they form only a small part of it. We hope that the chosen topics are representative and appealing. The connections among them provide a fertile ground for future research. We modestly hope that this article inspires others to develop these connections further. To this end, our refer- Figure 1. Georg Friedrich Bernhard Riemann. ence list includes a diverse collection of books and accessible articles. Given Riemann’s contributions to geometry, it There Is No Riemann Mapping Theorem in is not surprising that his name occurs twice in the Higher Dimensions title. It is more surprising that the uses of his name In an attempt to understand complex analysis here come from different parts of mathematics. We in several variables, especially questions revolv- find it delightful that contemporary mathematics ing around the failure of the Riemann mapping is forging connections that even Riemann could theorem, many mathematicians have focused at- not have anticipated. tention on geometric properties of the boundaries John P. D’Angelo is professor of mathematics at the Uni- of domains and how those geometric properties versity of Illinois. His email address is [email protected]. influence the complex analysis on the domain. edu. Such investigations have led to the fields of CR Jeremy T. Tyson is associate professor of mathemat- geometry and sub-Riemannian geometry. ics at the University of Illinois. His email address is We begin with the Riemann mapping theo- [email protected]. rem. Let Ω be an open, connected, and simply 208 Notices of the AMS Volume 57, Number 2 connected proper subset of C. Then there is a is no biholomorphic map from any polydisc to bijective holomorphic mapping f from Ω to the unit any ball. One classical proof of this statement disc D. The inverse mapping is also holomorphic. involves showing that the groups of biholomorphic We say that Ω and D are biholomorphically equiva- automorphisms of the ball and of the polydisc lent. The entire plane must of course be excluded, have different dimensions. because a bounded holomorphic function on C re- A second proof (see [D1, page 14]) proceeds in the duces to a constant. This theorem has applications following manner. First consider a biholomorphic throughout both pure and applied mathematics. In (or even proper) image Ω of the Cartesian product of many of these applications, such as uniform fluid bounded domains; one shows that bΩ must contain flow, the upper half plane substitutes for the unit complex analytic sets. Then an easy computation, disc. The explicit linear fractional transformation given in Lemma 6, shows that the definiteness of f (the Cayley transformation) defined by the Levi form precludes the existence of positive- i − w dimensional complex analytic subsets of b . This (1) z = f (w) = Ω i + w computation helps unify several of the ideas in this maps the upper half plane biholomorphically to article. For example, higher order commutators of the unit disc. complex vector fields can determine obstructions We mention in passing one of the most funda- to the existence of complex analytic sets in a real mental geometric generalizations of the Riemann hypersurface. Such obstructions lead to geometric mapping theorem, although we will not head in finite type conditions for subelliptic estimates. In that direction. The uniformization theorem states two complex dimensions a subelliptic estimate (see that the universal cover of a compact Riemann page 217) holds if and only if the bracket-generating surface must be one of three objects: the unit disc property (see page 212) holds. D, the complex plane C, or the Riemann sphere C. Consider a domain Ω with smooth boundary As a reference for analysis in one complex variable, bΩ. In order that geometric results about bΩ be we need only mention the classical text by Ahlfors meaningful for complex analysis on Ω, one requires [Ahl]. results concerning the boundary smoothness of Let us now consider complex Euclidean space Cn biholomorphic maps. Two early references in this of arbitrary dimension. We equip Cn with the usual area are [Bel] and [Fef]; we do not attempt to list any P Hermitian inner product given by hz; wi = zj w j of the many newer references. In general, smoothly and the corresponding norm given by jzj = hz; zi1=2. bounded domains, topologically equivalent to The unitary group U(n) consists of linear mappings the unit ball Bn, are seldom biholomorphically preserving the inner product. The unit ball Bn is equivalent to it. On the other hand, Fridman [Fri] the set of z for which jzj < 1. has established a wonderful approximate Riemann In dimension at least two the unit ball is not mapping theorem: given any topological ball and a biholomorphically equivalent to a half space. There positive , there is a biholomorphic mapping to a are many possible proofs. One approach takes into domain whose boundary is always within distance account the geometry of the boundaries. When the of the unit sphere. boundaries are smooth manifolds (as they are in this case), the Levi form plays a crucial role. The The Unit Sphere and the Heisenberg Group Levi form for a real hypersurface in Cn (for n ≥ 2) The quintessential principle connecting CR geom- is the complex variable analogue of the second etry and sub-Riemannian geometry arises from n fundamental form for a real hypersurface in R . the correspondence between the unit sphere bBn We define and discuss the Levi form on page 211. and the Heisenberg group, which bounds the For now we simply note that the Levi form is unbounded Siegel upper half space Hn. We will n−1 a Hermitian form defined on part of the tangent obtain a useful identification of bHn with C × R, spaces of the boundary. There is no Levi form in on which we will impose a nonabelian group law one dimension, because the tangent space is one arising from the biholomorphic automorphisms of real dimension and the part on which the Levi form Hn. The equivalence between Hn and Bn generalizes acts does not exist. For a half plane in dimension the one-dimensional Cayley transformation. at least 2 the Levi form is identically zero. For The Siegel upper half space Hn is the set of w the unit sphere it is positive definite. As a result in Cn such that the boundary geometries are so different that no n−1 biholomorphic mapping can exist. By contrast, X 2 (2) Im(wn) > jwj j : in one dimension, different boundary curves are j=1 indistinguishable from this point of view. A polydisc is a Cartesian product of discs. For The following elementary but useful identity is the 2 key to discovering the biholomorphic map: example, the subset of C defined by jz1j < 1 and 2 2 jz2j < 1 is a polydisc. It is also not biholomor- i + ζ i − ζ (3) Im(ζ) = − : phically equivalent to B2. In fact, for n ≥ 2 there 2 2 February 2010 Notices of the AMS 209 With ζ = wn we plug (3) into (2) and rewrite the CR Structures result to obtain We next discuss the geometry of a general real n 2 n−1 2 hypersurface M in C . The beautiful interplay i + wn X i − wn (4) > jw j2 + : between real and complex geometry dominates the 2 j 2 j=1 discussion. See [BER], [D1], [DT], [Jac], [Tre] and their references for more about CR geometry. After dividing by j i+wn j2 and changing notation, 2 We wish to consider complex vector fields and inequality (4) becomes therefore start by considering the complexified n X tangent bundle 1 > jz j2: j n = n ⊗ j=1 (6) CT(C ) T(C ) C: 2wj i−wn As usual in complex analysis we define the complex Here zj = for j < n and zn = . The reader i+wn i+wn partial derivative operators should check that this transformation f : w , z is ! @ 1 @ @ biholomorphic from Hn to Bn and also compare it = − i with the transformation in (1). @zj 2 @xj @yj and ! The automorphism group of Hn @ 1 @ @ = + i : We alluded earlier to the biholomorphic automor- @zj 2 @xj @yj phism groups of the ball and the polydisc. For any Using these operators we decompose the exterior complex manifold the automorphism group is a derivative d as fundamental algebraic invariant. For example, the n n X @f X @f automorphism group of the upper half plane in (7) df = @f + @f = dz + dz : @z j @z k C is PSL(2; R). Its elements act on the (one-point j=1 j k=1 k compactification of the) boundary of the upper half 2 Since d2 = 0, it follows that @2 = @ = @@ + @@ = 0. plane as linear fractional transformations x , ax+b , cx+d A section of the bundle (6) is a complex vector − = for ad bc 1.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Riemann's Contribution to Differential Geometry
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Elsevier - Publisher Connector Historia Mathematics 9 (1982) l-18 RIEMANN'S CONTRIBUTION TO DIFFERENTIAL GEOMETRY BY ESTHER PORTNOY UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN, URBANA, IL 61801 SUMMARIES In order to make a reasonable assessment of the significance of Riemann's role in the history of dif- ferential geometry, not unduly influenced by his rep- utation as a great mathematician, we must examine the contents of his geometric writings and consider the response of other mathematicians in the years immedi- ately following their publication. Pour juger adkquatement le role de Riemann dans le developpement de la geometric differentielle sans etre influence outre mesure par sa reputation de trks grand mathematicien, nous devons &udier le contenu de ses travaux en geometric et prendre en consideration les reactions des autres mathematiciens au tours de trois an&es qui suivirent leur publication. Urn Riemann's Einfluss auf die Entwicklung der Differentialgeometrie richtig einzuschZtzen, ohne sich von seinem Ruf als bedeutender Mathematiker iiberm;issig beeindrucken zu lassen, ist es notwendig den Inhalt seiner geometrischen Schriften und die Haltung zeitgen&sischer Mathematiker unmittelbar nach ihrer Verijffentlichung zu untersuchen. On June 10, 1854, Georg Friedrich Bernhard Riemann read his probationary lecture, "iber die Hypothesen welche der Geometrie zu Grunde liegen," before the Philosophical Faculty at Gdttingen ill. His biographer, Dedekind [1892, 5491, reported that Riemann had worked hard to make the lecture understandable to nonmathematicians in the audience, and that the result was a masterpiece of presentation, in which the ideas were set forth clearly without the aid of analytic techniques.
    [Show full text]
  • The Semi-Classical Sine-Gordon Equation, Universality at the Gradient Catastrophe and the Painlevé-I Equation
    The Semi-Classical Sine-Gordon Equation, Universality at the Gradient Catastrophe and the Painlevé-I Equation by Bingying Lu A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Mathematics) in the University of Michigan 2018 Doctoral Committee: Professor Peter Miller, Chair Professor Jinho Baik Professor Charles Doering Professor Herbert Winful Professor Sijue Wu Bingying Lu [email protected] ORCID iD: 0000-0001-6918-7211 c Bingying Lu 2018 Dedication To Lemur1, Lexie, Leeway and Lu Wu 1https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemur. A clade of strepsirrhine primates endemic to the island of Mada- gascar. ii Acknowledgements I want to thank everyone who made this thesis possible, in particular, my cheerful best friends, especially Wei Li, for their moral support; my gloomy best friends for listening to my existential anguish (many of them overlap); my parents for their unquestioning support of my daydreams; people I met in graduate school who taught me maths and otherwise; Mathematica for usually reliably converging to one answer after four to ten tries; Christian Klein who generously provided a Matlab code to help us visualise the solutions and pointed out that I can dive into cab driving business if mathematics ever not work out for me; Liming Ling for teaching me to find and plot rogue wave solutions; Guilherme Silva for teaching me how to generate videos in TEX; Samantha Xu who gave me a beamer template with a lemur—I left beamer but the lemur stayed; Songdi Fan for proofreading and attempting to add 500 determiners to my thesis (and th-fronting the word thesis); Wei Li (again!) for helping me with formatting; the very patient committee members for their guidance; and my advisor Peter Miller: I was convinced from the very beginning that he had worked out my thesis in the back of his mind but just wouldn’t tell me the answer.
    [Show full text]
  • 1-Introduction
    1-Introduction. Theory of everything is the theory that supposed to explain and linked together all physical aspects of the universe. Theory of everything has to explain and link together all forces existing in the universe such as strong nuclear forces, weak nuclear forces , electromagnetic forces and gravity. It should also give explanation to dark matter and dark energy. Theory of everything is one of the major unsolved problems in physics. There is a philosophical debate within the physics community as to whether a theory of everything deserves to be called the fundamental law of the universe or not. In Another word scientists asks whether a theory of everything can be a one fundamental law or some complicated mathematical equations. There are some trials from ancient Greece to Einstein to get the theory of everything but all of these attempts felt short. There are some trials after that such as string theory, superstring theory and M- theory but all of these trials led to more unsolved problems in physics. Steps to discover the theory of everything. 1- Scientists should have knowledge in everything such as physics, mathematics, biology and philosophy. 2- Scientists should look for something, which is logic to express the capability that creates the universe. Capability means energy if we talk about scientific terms. Energy is the capability of doing something. 3- Scientists should look for a type of motion, which it has already observed in the universe. This type of motion should collects all types of motion in the universe. 4- Scientists should look for a logic way to express the creation of the universe by using that type of motion, which they have chosen and give a prediction about the shape of the universe.
    [Show full text]
  • Georg Friedrich Bernhard Riemann
    Georg Friedrich Bernhard Riemann Born: 17 Sept 1826 in Breselenz, Hanover (now Germany) Died: 20 July 1866 in Selasca, Italy Click the picture above to see three larger pictures Show birthplace location Previous (Chronologically) Next Biographies Index Previous (Alphabetically) Next Main index Version for printing Bernhard Riemann's father, Friedrich Bernhard Riemann, was a Lutheran minister. Friedrich Riemann married Charlotte Ebell when he was in his middle age. Bernhard was the second of their six children, two boys and four girls. Friedrich Riemann acted as teacher to his children and he taught Bernhard until he was ten years old. At this time a teacher from a local school named Schulz assisted in Bernhard's education. In 1840 Bernhard entered directly into the third class at the Lyceum in Hannover. While at the Lyceum he lived with his grandmother but, in 1842, his grandmother died and Bernhard moved to the Johanneum Gymnasium in Lüneburg. Bernhard seems to have been a good, but not outstanding, pupil who worked hard at the classical subjects such as Hebrew and theology. He showed a particular interest in mathematics and the director of the Gymnasium allowed Bernhard to study mathematics texts from his own library. On one occasion he lent Bernhard Legendre's book on the theory of numbers and Bernhard read the 900 page book in six days. In the spring of 1846 Riemann enrolled at the University of Göttingen. His father had encouraged him to study theology and so he entered the theology faculty. However he attended some mathematics lectures and asked his father if he could transfer to the faculty of philosophy so that he could study mathematics.
    [Show full text]
  • Seifert Fibred Homology 3-Spheres and the Yang-Mills Equations on Riemann Surfaces with Marked Points
    ADVANCES IN MATHEMATICS 96, 38-102 (1992) Seifert Fibred Homology 3-Spheres and the Yang-Mills Equations on Riemann Surfaces with Marked Points MIKIO FURUTA * University of Tokyo, Hongo Tokyo 113, Japan, and Mathematical Institute, University of Oxford, 24-29 St. Giles’, Oxford OX1 3LB, United Kingdom AND BRIAN STEER Hertford College and Mathematical Institute, University of Oxford, 24-29 St. Giles’, Oxford OXI 3LB, United Kingdom In [9], A. Floer considered the Chern-Simons functional on the space of connexions on a homology 3-sphere C and, using Morse theoretic methods, defined periodic homology groups HZ,(C). The Euler charac- teristic of the homology turns out to be twice Casson’s invariant [34] and the critical points of the functional itself were identified as the flat con- nexions on the trivial SU(2)-bundle over C. This paper was motivated by a wish to know what these groups are when C is a Seifert fibred homology sphere. Large steps towards realizing this were taken by E. B. Nasatyr [20] and, especially, by R. Fintushel and R. Stern in [8], where the indices of the critical manifolds (of the Chern-Simons functional) were calculated. These indices are all even and the manifolds themselves even-dimensional. Fintushel and Stern completed the computation when the critical manifolds were all either points or 2-spheres, so including all cases with 3 or 4 excep- tional orbits. They conjectured that in general the Floer (or instanton) homology groups were the direct sum, with the appropriate indices, of the homology of the critical manifolds. We show that this is so.
    [Show full text]
  • The Riemann Hypothesis
    Problems of the Millennium: the Riemann Hypothesis E. Bombieri I. The problem. The Riemann zeta function is the function of the complex variable s, defined in the half-plane1 (s) > 1 by the absolutely convergent series ∞ 1 ζ(s):= , ns n=1 and in the whole complex plane C by analytic continuation. As shown by Riemann, ζ(s) extends to C as a meromorphic function with only a simple pole at s =1, with residue 1, and satisfies the functional equation s 1 − s π−s/2 Γ( ) ζ(s)=π−(1−s)/2 Γ( ) ζ(1 − s). (1) 2 2 In an epoch-making memoir published in 1859, Riemann [Ri] obtained an ana- lytic formula for the number of primes up to a preassigned limit. This formula is expressed in terms of the zeros of the zeta function, namely the solutions ρ ∈ C of the equation ζ(ρ)=0. In this paper, Riemann introduces the function of the complex variable t defined by 1 s ξ(t)= s(s − 1) π−s/2Γ( ) ζ(s) 2 2 1 with s = 2 +it, and shows that ξ(t) is an even entire function of t whose zeros have imaginary part between −i/2andi/2. He further states, sketching a proof, that in the range between 0 and T the function ξ(t) has about (T/2π)log(T/2π) − T/2π zeros. Riemann then continues: “Man findet nun in der That etwa so viel reelle Wurzeln innerhalb dieser Grenzen, und es ist sehr wahrscheinlich, dass alle Wurzeln reell sind.”, which can be translated as “Indeed, one finds between those limits about that many real zeros, and it is very likely that all zeros are real.” The statement that all zeros of the function ξ(t) are real is the Riemann hy- pothesis.
    [Show full text]
  • Riemann and His Zeta Function ∗
    Morfismos, Vol. 9, No. 2, 2005, pp. 1{48 Riemann and his zeta function ∗ Elena A. Kudryavtseva 1 Filip Saidak Peter Zvengrowski Abstract An exposition is given, partly historical and partly mathemat- ical, of the Riemann zeta function ζ(s) and the associated Rie- mann hypothesis. Using techniques similar to those of Riemann, it is shown how to locate and count non-trivial zeros of ζ(s). Rel- evance of these investigations to the theory of the distribution of prime numbers is discussed. 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification: 11M06, 11M26, 11A41, 11N05. Keywords and phrases: meromorphic functions, Riemann zeta function, gamma function, Riemann hypothesis. 1 Introduction The aim of this note is to give a straightforward introduction to some of the mysteries associated with the Riemann zeta function ζ(s) of a complex variable s and the Riemann hypothesis (usually written RH) about the location of its zeros, both from an historical and a mathe- matical perspective. The mathematical development will be largely self contained, and understandable to readers having a basic acquaintance with real and complex analysis. We hope to elucidate the answers to the following questions: (a) What is the Riemann zeta function? (b) What is the RH? (c) Why is this conjecture considered so important? ∗Invited Article. 1Partially supported by a PIMS Visiting Research Fellowship. 1 2 E. A. Kudryavtseva, F. Saidak, and P. Zvengrowski (d) Using techniques available to Riemann, how can one actually lo- cate zeros of ζ? (e) How much did Riemann know about RH (did he even consider it relevant)? (f) What is the history of this problem since Riemann? (g) What is some of the current research being done on RH? (In par- ticular, recent work of the authors will be briefly mentioned in this context.) The zeta function is intimately connected with the distribution of the primes.
    [Show full text]
  • Lunar 1000 Challenge List
    LUNAR 1000 CHALLENGE A B C D E F G H I LUNAR PROGRAM BOOKLET LOG 1 LUNAR OBJECT LAT LONG OBJECTIVE RUKL DATE VIEWED BOOK PAGE NOTES 2 Abbot 5.6 54.8 37 3 Abel -34.6 85.8 69, IV Libration object 4 Abenezra -21.0 11.9 55 56 5 Abetti 19.9 27.7 24 6 Abulfeda -13.8 13.9 54 45 7 Acosta -5.6 60.1 49 8 Adams -31.9 68.2 69 9 Aepinus 88.0 -109.7 Libration object 10 Agatharchides -19.8 -30.9 113 52 11 Agrippa 4.1 10.5 61 34 12 Airy -18.1 5.7 63 55, 56 13 Al-Bakri 14.3 20.2 35 14 Albategnius -11.2 4.1 66 44, 45 15 Al-Biruni 17.9 92.5 III Libration object 16 Aldrin 1.4 22.1 44 35 17 Alexander 40.3 13.5 13 18 Alfraganus -5.4 19.0 46 19 Alhazen 15.9 71.8 27 20 Aliacensis -30.6 5.2 67 55, 65 21 Almanon -16.8 15.2 55 56 22 Al-Marrakushi -10.4 55.8 48 23 Alpetragius -16.0 -4.5 74 55 24 Alphonsus -13.4 -2.8 75 44, 55 25 Ameghino 3.3 57.0 38 26 Ammonius -8.5 -0.8 75 44 27 Amontons -5.3 46.8 48 28 Amundsen -84.5 82.8 73, 74, V Libration object 29 Anaxagoras 73.4 -10.1 76 4 30 Anaximander 66.9 -51.3 2 31 Anaximenes 72.5 -44.5 3 32 Andel -10.4 12.4 45 33 Andersson -49.7 -95.3 VI Libration object 34 Angstrom 29.9 -41.6 19 35 Ansgarius -12.7 79.7 49, IV Libration object 36 Anuchin -49.0 101.3 V Libration object 37 Anville 1.9 49.5 37 38 Apianus -26.9 7.9 55 56 39 Apollonius 4.5 61.1 2 38 40 Arago 6.2 21.4 44 35 41 Aratus 23.6 4.5 22 42 Archimedes 29.7 -4.0 78 22, 12 43 Archytas 58.7 5.0 76 4 44 Argelander -16.5 5.8 63 56 45 Ariadaeus 4.6 17.3 35 46 Aristarchus 23.7 -47.4 122 18 47 Aristillus 33.9 1.2 69 12 48 Aristoteles 50.2 17.4 48 5 49 Armstrong 1.4 25.0 44
    [Show full text]
  • A Dynamical Key to the Riemann Hypothesis Chris King Emeritus, University of Auckland 11 May – 16 Oct 2011 V1.48 ( )
    A Dynamical Key to the Riemann Hypothesis Chris King Emeritus, University of Auckland 11 May – 16 Oct 2011 v1.48 ( http://arxiv.org/abs/1105.2103 ) Abstract: We investigate a dynamical basis for the Riemann hypothesis1 (RH) that the non-trivial zeros of the Riemann zeta function lie on the critical line x = !. In the process we graphically explore, in as rich a way as possible, the diversity of zeta and L-functions, to look for examples at the boundary between those with zeros on the critical line and otherwise. The approach provides a dynamical basis for why the various forms of zeta and L-function have their non-trivial zeros on the critical line. It suggests RH is an additional unprovable postulate of the number system, similar to the axiom of choice, arising from the asymptotic behavior of the primes as n ! " . The images in the figures are generated using a Mac software research application developed by the author, which is available at: http://dhushara.com/DarkHeart/RZV/. It includes open source files for XCode compilation for flexible research use and scripts for the open source math packages PARI-GP and SAGE to generate L-functions of elliptic curves and modular forms. # "1 The Riemann zeta function !(z) = $n"z = % (1" p"z ) Re(z)>1 is defined as either a sum of n=1 p!prime complex exponentials over integers, or as a product over primes, due to Euler’s prime sieving. The " zeta function is a unitary example of a Dirichlet series !z , which are similar to power series #ann n=1 except that the terms are complex exponentials of integers, rather than being integer powers of a complex variable as with power series.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring the Riemann Hypothesis a Thesis Submitted to Kent State University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the D
    Exploring the Riemann Hypothesis A thesis submitted To Kent State University in partial Fulfillment of the requirement for the Degree of Master of Sciences By Cory Henderson August, 2013 Table of Contents Introduction………………………………………………………………..page 1 Some history of Bernhard Riemann and his hypothesis……………..page 6 Building the Riemann zeta function…………………………………….page 20 The likelihood that Riemann hypothesis is true and the PNT………..page 36 What we can take away from it all………………………………………page 54 Bibliography……………………………………………………………….page 58 ii Introduction If you haven’t really heard of the Riemann hypothesis before, then a quick bit of research will probably make the impression on you that it is a somewhat important open problem in mathematics. You will likely take notice that it is still not proved. It has been around for over 150 years, and yet, the Riemann hypothesis still doesn’t have a proof which shows with certainty that Riemann had something more than conjecture when he made his famous (or perhaps infamous, depending on how you look at it) statement. It won’t take long for you to stumble upon the connection which has been drawn between the Riemann hypothesis and its consequences on the distribution of prime numbers. Essentially, if the Riemann hypothesis is true, then we better understand how the prime numbers are distributed amongst the positive integers. If it should turn out that the Riemann hypothesis isn’t true, then we might have an interesting subset of prime numbers to look at as a consequence of the places where Riemann’s hypothesis breaks down. I can just imagine that set being called the non-Riemannian Primes or something like that.
    [Show full text]
  • ANALYTIC PROOF of the PRIME NUMBER THEOREM a Thesis Submitted to Kent State University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement
    ANALYTIC PROOF OF THE PRIME NUMBER THEOREM A thesis submitted To Kent State University in partial Fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science by Maha Mosaad Alghamdi May, 2019 © Copyright All rights reserved Except for previously published materials Thesis written by Maha Mosaad Alghamdi B.S., Dammam University, 2011 M.S., Kent State University, 2019 Approved by Gang Yu , Advisor Andrew Tonge , Chair, Department of Mathematical Sciences James L. Blank , Dean, College of Arts and Sciences TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................... III LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................................. V ACKNOWLEDGMENTS................................................................................................................................. VI CHAPTERS 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 1 2. SUMMATION FORMULAS............................................................................................................... 6 2.1 Abelian Summation Formula ............................................................................................... 6 2.2 Euler-Maclaurin Summation Formula ............................................................................. 8 3. DIRICHLET SERIES AND EULER PRODUCTS .....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Riemannian Geometry
    Riemannian Geometry Contents Chapter 1. Smooth manifolds 5 1. Tangent vectors, cotangent vectors and tensors 5 2. The tangent bundle of a smooth manifold 5 3. Vector fields, covector fields, tensor fields, n-forms 5 Chapter 2. Riemannian manifolds 7 1. Riemannian metric 7 2. The three model geometries 9 3. Connections 13 4. Geodesics and parallel translation along curves 16 5. The Riemannian connection 17 6. Connections on submanifolds and pull-back connections 19 7. Geodesics in the three geometries 20 8. The exponential map and normal coordinates 21 9. The Riemann distance function 25 Chapter 3. Curvature 29 1. The Riemann curvature tensor 29 2. Ricci curvature, scalar curvature, and Einstein metrics 31 3. Riemannian submanifolds 33 4. Sectional curvature 36 5. Jacobi fields 38 6. Comparison theorems 44 Chapter 4. Space-times 47 Chapter 5. Multilinear Algebra 49 1. Tensors 49 2. Tensors of inner product spaces 51 3. Coordinate expressions 52 Chapter 6. Non-euclidean geometry 55 1. The hyperbolic plane 55 Bibliography 59 3 CHAPTER 1 Smooth manifolds 1. Tangent vectors, cotangent vectors and tensors 1.1. Lemma. Let F : M m → N n be a smooth map. Suppose that (x1, . , xm) are local co- ordinates on M and (y1, . , yn) local coordinates on N. Then ∂ ∂(yiF ) ∂ (1.2) F∗( ∂xj ) = ∂xj ∂yi , 1 ≤ j ≤ m, ∗ i ∂(yiF ) j i (1.3) F (dy ) = ∂xj dx = d(y F ), 1 ≤ i ≤ n t ∂(yiF ) ∂(yiF ) The (n × m)-matrix ∂xj is the matrix for F∗ and the (m × n)-matrix ∂xj is the matrix for F ∗.
    [Show full text]