Thread: Riemann Hypothesis

I think a best answer to the question about the significance of Riemann Hypothesis
is done in the submissions ArXiv 1006.0381 and ArXiv 1208.4525.
Phisical aspects of the question is given in ArXiv. 1102.5668

Are you Ilgar Jabbarov?

Dear Strage, tahnk you for reply.
If you hve questions to the autor you can write to his e-mails
given in ArXiv 1208.4525. The russian variant of the ArXiv 1006.0381
may be found in the page of autor in Reserch Gate.

Are you Ilgar Jabbarov?

Thank you. I hope guidelines request not to address the opinions to personal traits.
By this reason I will swerve from the answer to this question. The original aim of my
creation of this thread (for what I especially joined) is to express my thoughts about
the theme of early discussions "What is the significance of the Riemann Hypothesis?".
If the RH firstly was conjectured for understandind of distribution of prime numbers,
various approches directed to solving of the problem and various equivalences showed
that RH is connected with many of basic questions of mathematics. These reasonings sufficiently
brightly showed in the indicated submissions. A new measure introduced there makes
a necessity to look many questions of the classical measure theoy from the new point of view
destroying old representations. And solution of RH looks as a simplest application of a new
approch. Amasing behavior of some curves in infinite dimensional spaces which is nonsatisfied
in finite dimensions has a deep lasting conclusions. From this point of view it is very small the probability
that the RH can be solved by many ways, especially by using of Haar or product measures.
It is possible to make some phisical abservations from the said above.

I'll take that as a "yes".

Has your proof been published in a peer-reviewed journal? If not, why not?

My understanding is that there is a significant prize available for proving the Riemann hypothesis. Are you planning to apply for this? If not, why not?
Millennium Prize Problems

Which incentives engaged earlier researchers?
If someone tries to solve a mathimatical problem for the purpose
of to win prizes, takes a risk to loss much more.
Only that mathematician can be sucsessive in way of solving the problem
like RH which stimulated with perfectly other principles.
I think the reviewer convinced of the equality all the regular mesures
defined in infinite dimensional spaces nesessarily will
reject a paper like 1006.0381 or others.

There have been several mathematicians that have worked on the Riemann Hypothesis long before any financial prize was on offer, they did it because they could and that's what they enjoyed, just like climber's climb mountains.

Great mathematicians like Hilbert and Littlewood have all contributed work towards the Riemann Hypothesis and for all intensive purposes it's accepted as true, but it's the definitive proof that is still required to prove it and this is why the money is on offer.

Should the prize money be withdrawn if a mathematician was capable of producing such a proof they would still go ahead for the fame and prestige.

“It is my belief that RH is a genuinely arithmetic question that likely will not succumb to methods of analysis.”- B. Conrey.
I agree with this opinion in the following reduction that RH will not succumb to methods of modern analysis. Modern means here the state of mathematics up to Bourbaki. Many of famous mathematicians counts that RH is not soluble in the frame of existing system of axioms.
I am sharing with you the thoughts concerning Prize, relevantly recall the case of dr. G. Perelman. It is clear that any proof of the RH will not stop new investigations to find another solutions of the problem. Beauty of the mathematics is focused in its unpredictability.