Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to www.scribd.com

0% found this document useful (0 votes)
54 views4 pages

Topics in Analytic Number Theory, Lent 2013. Lecture 21: The Convexity Bound, N (T)

This document summarizes key points from a lecture on analytic number theory: 1) It proves a "convexity bound" on L-functions within the critical strip using Stirling's approximation and the functional equation. 2) It shows that the number of zeros of the zeta function and L-functions in the critical strip, up to height T, is approximately T/2π log T/2π - T/2π plus lower order terms. 3) It introduces the concept of subconvex bounds, which improve on the convexity bound, and notes that subconvex bounds are known for the zeta function and L-functions.

Uploaded by

Eric Parker
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
54 views4 pages

Topics in Analytic Number Theory, Lent 2013. Lecture 21: The Convexity Bound, N (T)

This document summarizes key points from a lecture on analytic number theory: 1) It proves a "convexity bound" on L-functions within the critical strip using Stirling's approximation and the functional equation. 2) It shows that the number of zeros of the zeta function and L-functions in the critical strip, up to height T, is approximately T/2π log T/2π - T/2π plus lower order terms. 3) It introduces the concept of subconvex bounds, which improve on the convexity bound, and notes that subconvex bounds are known for the zeta function and L-functions.

Uploaded by

Eric Parker
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

Topics in analytic number theory, Lent 2013.

Lecture 21: The convexity bound, N (T )


Bob Hough
May 9, 2013
We now prove the convexity bound needed at the end of the last lemma from
the previous lecture, and transition to several lectures on L-functions within the
critical strip.
Recall that Stirlings approximation gives that uniformly for +  <
arg(z) <  and |z| > ,
log (z) = (z 1/2) log z z + O(1).
Well use two specific consequences of this.
1. There exist constants c1 , c2 such that for 1/2 4, and for | + it| >
1/4,
c1 e|t|/2 (1 + |t|)1/2 |( + it)| c2 e|t|/2 (1 + |t|)1/2 .
2. For T 2,
arg (1/2 + iT ) = T log T T + O(1).
For the purpose of proving the convexity bound well specialize to the case
of L(s, ) with mod q a primitive even character. The argument would apply with trivial modifications to the odd primitive characters, and it would go
through for under the assumption |t| 2 (to avoid the pole).
We first prove a lemma that bounds L(s, ) on the line <(s) = 0.
Lemma 21.1. We have the bound
p
|L(it, )|  q 1 + |t| log(q + |t|).
Proof. This is a straightforward consequence of the functional equation
(s, ) = (q/)s/2 (s/2)L(s, ) =  (q/)(1s)/2 ((1s)/2)L(1s, ) =  (s, ).
Indeed, it follows (| | = 1)
|L( + it, )| =

|( 1it
)|
1
2
(q/) 2 |L(1 it, )|.
+it
|( 2 )|

At this point we could use Theorem 14.1 to bound |L(1 it, )|  log(q + |t|),
but well show another proof.
1

Recall the Hadamard product


A +B s

(s, ) = e

Y

so that

X
0
(s, ) = B +

s
1

es/

1
1
+
s

Take real parts, and recall (Lemma 7.2) that B = <


<

X
0
(s, ) =

.
P1

to find

,
( )2 + (t )2

=+i

which is convergent. If 1 then this is positive, hence |(s, )| is increasing


in . It follows that




1

|(1 it, )| 1 +
it,
log(q + |t|)
and thus


|L(1 it, )|  L 1 +



1
it,  log(q + |t|).
log(q + |t|)

We now prove a general convexity type result.


Theorem 21.2. Let 0 a, b 1/2. Let 1/2 0 < 1. Let T 3 and let
mod q be primitive even. Suppose that on the segment 0 iq + iT /2, 0 +
iq + 3iT /2 we have the bound
|L(0 + it, )|  (1 + |t|)a(10 )+ q b(10 +) .
Then for 0 1 we have the bound
|L( + iT, )|  (1 + T )a(1)+ q b(1)+ log(q + T ).
Proof. Let B be the box with corners at
0 + iT i(q + T /2),

1+

1
+ iT i(q + T /2).
log(q + T )

Define function F (s) on B by


F (s) = L(s, )

(2 + as)
q bs
1
.

b(+it)
(2 + a( + iT )) q
(cos 4 (s ( + iT )))4

Write this as F (s) = L(s, )f (s). Then since F (s) is holomorphic on B,


|F ( + iT )| = |L( + iT, )| sup |F (s)|.
sB

Now the factor of cos(...) has been inserted so as to guarantee that |f (s)| is
exponentially small in q and T on the top and bottom edges of the box. Since
2

L(s, ) is polynomially bounded in q and T , the top and bottom edges may be
ignored. Notice similarly that on the line <(s) = 0 ,
|f (0 + it)|
 e(1a/2)|tT |
|f (0 + iT )|
so that the maximum occurs at t = T (at least, up to constants). Thus the
maximum of F (0 + it) is bounded by
 (1 + T )a(0 ) q b(0 )

max
t[T /2q,3T /2+q]

|L(0 + it, )|

 (1 + |T |)a(1)+ q b(1)+ .
Similarly, f (s) takes its maximum on the line <(s) = 1 + 1/(log(q + T )) at t = T
(at least, to within constants), and so we obtain a bound on this line of




1
a(1) b(1)

 (1 + |T |)
q
sup L(1 +
+ it, )
log(q + |T |)
t
 (1 + |T |)a(1) q b(1) log(q + T ).
The result follows.
Combining the convexity principle with our bound for L(s, ) near <(s) = 0
we deduce the following corollary.
Corollary 1. For each 0 1 we have the bound
1

|L( + it, )|  (1 + |t|) 2 (1)+ q 2 (1)+ .

For a given R, let B() be the least real number such that
|L( + it, )| q (1 + |t|)B()+
for all t R (neglecting the q dependance, which could also be considered). The
above results are called convexity principles because they show that B() is a
convex function of . For 1 we have B() = 0 by absolute convergence of
the Dirichlet series, while for 0 we have B() = 1/2 , by the functional
equation. The convexity result proves that for 0 < < 1, B() 21 (1). Any
bound that improves this is called a sub-convex bound. Subconvex bounds are
known for and L(s, ), both with respect to t and q. The Lindeloff Hypothesis
predicts that B() = 1/2 for 0 1/2 and B() = 0 for 1/2 . This
would follow from the Riemann Hypothesis. We will prove the implication next
week.

Counting zeros
We now give a sharp asymptotic count for the number of zeros of zeta and Lfunctions in the box {s = + it, 0 1, |t| < T }. Since the zeros of are
symmetric with respect to the real axis, we define
N (T ) = #{ = + i : () = 0, 0 < T }.
3

An important role is also played by S(T ) = arg (1/2 + iT ), defined, for T not
equal to the imaginary part of a zero of zeta, by continuous variation from 2
to 2 + iT , and from there to 1/2 + iT (at the ordinate of a zero, define S(T )
arbitrarily).
For L(s, ) we note that the zeros will not generally be symmetrically positioned with respect to the real axis, so we count
N (T, ) = #{ = + i : (, ) = 0, || < T }.
Theorem 21.3. For T > 1 we have the asymptotic
N (T ) =

T
T
1
T
log

+ S(T ) + O(1).
2
2 2

Again for T 1,
N (T, ) =

T
qT
T
log
+ O(log qT )

Proof. We show the proof for , the proof for L(s, ) being similar. We have
Z
1
N (T ) =
0 /(s)ds
2i B
where box B has corners at 2, 2+iT, 1+iT, 1. The integral between -1 and 2,
being imaginary, does not contribute. The contributions of the segments from
(2, 2 + iT ) and (2 + iT, 1/2 + iT ) match those from the reflected segments, by
the functional equation. Thus N (T ) = 1 arg (s), the change being between 2
and 1/2 + iT . The change in argument of s and s 1 are each O(1). The change
in s/2 is T /2 log . The change in (s/2) is, by Stirling, T /2 log T /2T /2+
O(1) so that
N (T ) = T /2 log T /2 T /2 +

1
S(T ) + O(1)

You might also like