Proof for Riemann H y p o t h e s i s.

(Mathew Cherian BE, MBA(Western Michigan University.)

on private independent research.)

Abstract: Proof of Riemann’s, hypothesis , that the real part of the solution of ξ function is
½ is proved. Secondly all the roots of the Riemann ξ function lie own the ½ plane is also
proved. Historical development of this area of Mathematics from Gauss, Legrange, Euler,
Riemann to Hilbert is discussed. Initially. a surrogate differential equation for ξ function is
derived and taking the roots of the differential equation, it is proved that the real trivial part
of Riemann ξ function is ½. Also Riemann’s ξ =∫ 1/Ln(x) between limits 2 and ‘n’, gives the
number of Prime numbers between 0 and that number x. So I choose the original ξ function of
Riemann to prove it. This is given in the book “God created Integers” by Prof. Stephen
Hawkins published by Penguin which is a good reference for this. A second part of the proof
requires that the non-trivial complex part of the root must lie on the ½ plane which is also
proved by proving the Elliptical nature of the ξ function. Please refer any books on basic
building blocks of, conic sections and their relationships and roots for Parabolic, Hyperbolic
and Elliptical functions. There is a good book by Prof. Hardy on, this, on’ Complex
Numbers’.

Two differential equations are derived which are similar to each other with different constant
terms ‘c’. One is used to calculate the constant term of the other. This method is employed to
elicit the elliptical nature of Riemann ξ function which is widely used in Engineering. The
application of which is given in two different papers of mine separately.

Part I. Legrange and Gauss conjured that п(x) the function counting all the primes less than x
asymptotically approaches Li(x) meaning п(x)/Li(x) tend to 1, where,
n
Li(x) = ∫ dx/ln(x)
2
Euler created a time series solution to the function Li(x) and Riemann named it the ξ function
adding his own solution to Euler’s work.

In Riemann’s words “a value x is the root of a function f(x) if f(x)=0. A root of the function
ξ(x) is real if and only if the root of the zeta function is complex number with real part equal
to ½”.

Proving the real part to be ½ was left undone by Riemann. Hilbert later on added, finding the
proof for Riemann hypothesis as one of the problem that remain un resolved in Mathematics.
(Ref.Stephen Hawkins)

Also Riemann’s Hypothesis conjures that all the non-trivial roots of Riemann’s ξ function lie
on the ½ plane, which also need be proved according to Prof. Calvin Clawson(Ref).
So the conjunctures proved are 1)the trivial root of Riemann ξ function is at ½ and 2) the
non-trivial roots are all on the ½ plane.
Riemann Zeta function’s Formation from Gauss’s conjuncture.

Consider a Sine wave.

Sine 450= 1/√2
Cosec 45o=√2 = (1/ln 2 ), which gives the primes at 2.
Now, ∫1/ln(2)=1.414+1+1 = 3 approximately gives the primes before 2 which is like
integrating 1/ln(x) or ∫1/ln(x)
Continuing like this if we substitute x by 3,4 ….. etc; we see,
∫1/ln(x) gives the primes before x, which is what Riemann ξ function first part is all about.
For Eg; ∫1/ln(3)=1+1+0.686+1.1=4

Heuristic Proof
Consider a Cycloid, transiting in Sine formation. The, time period for it is ∏ radians. The
peak of it is seen at ∏/2, where we find the non-trivial root. Now, if we remove the common
factor ∏ from the time scale to, convert the time scale to numerical from trigonometric, we
see that the trivial root is at numerical 1/2.
Note: We can say from the above that the Lactus Rectum (inside the ellipse at ½ where the
roots appear) of the Ellipse is at ½ which is the constant term ‘c’ of the differential equation
elicited later below. ‘a’ and ‘b’ constants of the differential equation are the x-axis
eccentricity and the y-axis of the ellipse.

Part 2. Proof
To get an initial peep into Riemann ξ function, we consider the entire number line as
consisting of concentric circles with the number as half the diameter of twice the number.
That is the number become the radius. Draw an isosless triangle above the diameter. Now
construct an equilateral triangle inside the isosless triangle. Now take the number 4 and
radius becomes 2. The corner of the equilateral triangle is seen to be close to the Natural
Logrithm of 2 with approximately an error of 25%. So we can write,
Ln(x)= (1.25(x(2-√2))/2
= 0.36612.x
As we go up the number circles we see that the logarithm may not be (2-√2) distance from
the corner of the isosless triangle drawn, but this overcome by figuring out the appropriate
growth rate down below called ‘a’.
Reciprocating LHS and RHS and integrating,
∫1/Ln(x)=∫1/0.36612.x
=1/0.36612∫1/x
=ln(x)/0.36612 + (x/11)e0.5 where the second term is the error term and so the whole
RHS can be written as,
Ln(x)/0.36612+(x/11)e0.5= a.(ln(x)/0.36612)
Here ’ a’ is found to be,
a= 1+(x.e0.5.0.36612/(ln(x).11))
Therefore Riemann ξ function,
∫1/Ln(x)= ln(x)/0.36612[1+x/ln(x)(0.054875), simplifying we get,
=(ln(x)/0.36612)+(x/0.36612)(0.54875)

=(ln(x)/0.36612)+(x(0.14988))

ie; ∫1/ln(x).dx=(ln(x)/0.36612)+0.14988.x
This shows that there is a ‘conservation law’ for the Riemann ξ function, meaning the
constants being invariant, being constants conserved for all x values in R, for the function.
Here we elicit Professor Emma Bonners Theorem, that “All continuous symmetries has an
associated conservation law”[Ref; Professor Kenneth W. Ford]. Hence we infer that Riemann
ξ Function is continuously symmetric giving us a clue that the Riemann ξ function must be
Elliptical and the continuous symmetry must be Sine function nature of their functionality, as
in Natures continuous Symmetry derived later.
The continuous symmetry of Riemann ξ function derived from Geometry and Professor
Emma Bonners theorem throws light into the similarity of it with the continuous symmetry of
nature which is small ellipses distributed in space time continuum, the Granular nature of
atmosphere. This makes us elicite the Diaphentine equation y2=x2+a which Diphentus
thought had no solution but was proved by Brahma Gupta in later centuries. Brahma Gupta
found that Diaphentine equation is in-fact Elliptical function and has Complex roots.
We use the modern version of the so called Elliptical function of Brhama Gupta as
Differential Equation for the proof of Riemann ξ function later on.
The table below gives the number of Primes calculated from the above deduction of Riemann
ξ function compared to actual primes, up to 1000. One can go beyond this number.
Number Actual Primes Calculated Primes from formula above
2 3 2.27
8 6 6.8
14 8 9.28
20 10 11.10
26 11 12.81
33 13 14.58
100 27 27.40
1000 170 168.75

The equation derived show that the area of the Riemann ξ function derived between ½ and 2
is 0, giving as an initial proof for the trivial part of Riemann Hypothesis.
Now we start the more involved proof for the same.

I start where Riemann left his hypothesis without the proof.

 n
As said earlier Li(x) =  dx/Ln(x)
2

Riemann conjured that the function ξ = ∫ 1/ln(x) has the real part of the root at ½ when s=2
We start with the time series expansion of Log function which is,
((x-1)/(x-2))+1/3((x-3)/(x-4))+1/5((x-5)/(x-6))+……..= Ln(x)
Now let this be reduced to the differential equation in the t-domain.
f ”(x)+f ’(x)+c= Ln(x)
Note(1)
Also, as a first pass check on the above equation, take,
f “(x) +f’(x)+c = 1/Ln(x)
Integrating we have, f’(x)+x+c.x=∫1/Ln(x)
Considering the motion of an electron we see motion from -1 to 0 is -1, so f ‘(x)= -1 and x is
motion from 0 to 1 which is 1 and substituting these numbers in the above equation we get,
c=∫1/Ln(x)
This also confirms that the orbits of an atom need be circular making the Riemann ξ function
necessarily homogeneous in nature, where a=b in the above equation in Note(1).
Prof. Albert Einstein used to repeatedly state that nature is a ‘closed form’ system and we can
take it as such. The Homogeneous nature of Riemann’s ξ function confirms it knowing the
parallels of it with matter physics. Even Pauli’s exclusion principle directly shows pair
existence of electrons in Molecules first orbit which has opposite ‘spins’ , the significance
visible from the Riemann ξ function, which will be more visible later on this derivations
when we encounter roots of which are conjugates. This seems to be the solution sought for
Poincare conjuncture. We also see later that homogeneous differential equation of Riemann ξ
function which is manifestation of ‘momentum’ suddenly shifts when the first two terms of
the differential equation vanishes on integration to get Riemann ξ function, form one with
‘position’, an idea elusive to Quantum science even now or work is going on now which is
the significance of Paulis exclusion principle or Heisenbergs. The results of the Riemann ξ
function gives the power available in a closed system when we subtract 1 from the results ie;
sum of all primes before a number which is what Riemann ξ function is all about, an idea
Professor Gauss might have been trying grapple with when he proposed the idea of ξ function
which was again highlighted by Professor Riemann.
Also Professor Dirac’s ‘q’ numbers where transformation of Fermions to Bosons can be
considered as the process taking place when the integration of 1/Ln(x) in

Riemann ξ function is done. Bosons are the carriers of power or transmission mechanism, so
the above affirmation about power.(Ref. Smolin, Stewert)
A significant grasp of Physics and Electrical Engineering is expected before one can grapple
with these ideas which is my disclaimer when going through the proof for Riemann ξ
function.
Note(2):
Applying Taylor series, to the time series whose 3rd and 2nd term forms of the equation above
Note(1) the first two terms of the differential equation and the rest of the terms forming c, we
have,
2. f “(x)/2!+ 1. f’(x)+c.
Note: Taylor series is defined f(x) = Ao+A1.f’(x)/1!+A2.f”(x)/2! for a second order function
and the function repeating with higher order derivatives for functions of respective orders,
where A’s are the time scales, 1, 2......&C. Since, higher derivatives don’t exist for lower
order functions. For example f(x)=x2 cannot be differentiated below the second
differentiation. This process is initiated to elicit the Elliptical nature of Riemann Zeta
function and even if objection arise otherwise about the method chosen, then appropriate
choice of the constant term in the closed form derived nullifies such objections.
Here we see a = 1 and b =1 making the log function an Elliptical function, so the roots must
be Imaginary or Complex roots, which means the Integral of it’s reciprocal, also must be
Elliptical and so with complex roots.
Also, let
f “(x)=ω2,
f ‘ (x)=ω, where f”(x) and f’(x) are the basis of the quadratic differential equation, which is
the rate at which the axis change. ‘a’ , ‘b’ and ‘c’ are the constants which

define the function along with the basis. It is these constants that define the character of the
function with basis chosen accordingly to define the dynamics. Here and later we see that the
first two terms of the equation vanish leaving the dynamics of the Riemann Zeta function
described by the lone constant term ‘c’.
Take, ω= (-1+i.√3)/2 = 3√1, (cube root of 1) [Ref:John Derbyshire]
let, a.ω2+b.ω+c=(x/ln(x))√φ, the right hand side will be revealed in a short while below.
This is another form of, a.f “(x)+b.f ‘(x) + c=(x/ln(x))√φ
It is known that there are 3 cases for the above type of Quadratic differential equation where,
1)a=b 2)a>b and 3) a<b. Case 1 is called the Elliptical function, case 2 is the Hyperbolic
function and case 3 is the Parabolic function.
Note:
From Trigonometry it is known that.
Sin(A+B)= Sin A. Cos B + Cos A. Sin B
Take A=B = π, so that the above function equates to zero.
This means that a point tracing a circle moves from 0 to π and from π to 0 negative.
So, Sine(0)=0 and Sine (2π) is zero, which can happen only if the point starts at 0 trace a
circle which is an ellipse, where we took A=B and case 1 ensues.

We take the case of a=b, a=1 and b=1 for simplicity, the Elliptical case
The above Equation becomes as follows with right hand side remaining same as above,
((-1+i.√3)/2)(-1+i.√3)/2)+(-1+i.√3)/2+c = (x/ln(x))√φ)
(1-i√3-i√3-3)/4 + (-1+i√3)/2+c = ((x/ln(x))√φ )
(-2-2.i.√3)/4 + (1+i√3)/2+c = (x/ln(x))√φ )
-2(1+i.√3)/4 + (1+i.√3)/2+c = (x/ln(x))√φ)
-[(1+i.√3)/2] + [(1+i.√3)/2]+c=(x/ln(x))√φ)
Canceling like terms with opposite signs the equation become,
C= (x/Ln(x))√φ, the right hand side again will be revealed shortly how it is got.
Now, we can try for a>b and a<b substituting the same terms.
Let a=2 and b=1, so that the equation above becomes,
2.ω2+ω+c=(x/Ln(x) )√φ)

Substituting for ω as above and leaving right hand side same as above,
2[-2(1+i.√3)/4]+(-1+i√3)/2+c=(x/Ln(x) )√φ)
-4/4(1+i√3) + (-1+i√3)/2 + c = (x/Ln(x) )√φ)
(-1+i√3)+(-1+i√3)/2+c =(x/Ln(x) )√φ)
This is degenerate or fallible direction then the Trivial root of Riemann ξ function won’t be at
½, since (b+/-√b2-4ac/2a) has the trivial root at ¼ so not Riemann ξ function.
Similar is the case for a<b where a=1 and b=2 representative of all such functions’ the trivial
root become 1, so not what Riemann conjured as 1/2.
So a<b and a>b are degenerate cases for Riemann’s conjuncture and a=b is the right route
which gives the Elliptical function that gives the trivial root at 1/2 as conjured by Riemann so
should be taken as the Riemann ξ function.
So we have a Homogeneous Function for Riemann Zeta Function, as proved, above.
I conjure that we can take any root instead of √1, like √2 or √3 for the differential

which is the basis & C accordingly. in which case the procedure can become more

complicated though the results won’t differ. If we take constants other than what

makes the trivial root at ½ and non-trivial on complex plane, then Riemann’s

conjuncture looses its practical meaning of direction to the underlying phenomenon

of Nature and leads us nowhere. Then the question may arise as to what is the

underlying phenomenon. It is that, the Generating Circle of an oscillation is an

Ellipse. This ellipse is a Circle so, Homogeneous in the sense that ‘a’ being equal to

‘b’ gives radius of curvature equal when a circle is drawn with either one of them as
radius taking same scale for both axes though one is complex and one real.

Note:

The Generating circle mentioned above is like the first orbit of an Oxygen atom

with two electrons in the first orbit, the two complex roots represent the two

electrons. The whole process above was initiated to prove that Riemann’s

conjuncture if has to be right, then the function need be Homogeneous in which case

only the trivial root will be on ½ and the non-trivial roots on the complex plane.

Homogeneous nature of Riemann ξ function is the background for linear dynamics of non-
forced oscillations, described by moving the Ellipse with centre on the phase axis and
marking a fixed point at the extreme diameter as the ellipse is moved forward, which gives
the Cycloid or the Sine curve.
From Hamilton [Ref:John Derbyshire] we know that (1+i)(1-i)=0, the factors of zero. So all
the different roots of Riemann ξ function will be of this form or with each term of this form
multiplied by same integer. For example even (3+3i)(3-3i) is a factor or Zero. This shows that
both roots of Riemann ξ function lie on the extremities of a Circle and their difference will be
0, which is a condition for an Ellipse to be a Circle. This Circle so lie on the ½ plane as
shown above.
Also we see that the roots being of the form (1+i) and (1-i) are the electrons on the first orbit
of an atom and their product is 0 which can be the median position of the roots from where
the Cycloid starts towards a modulus of (1+i)=√2 making it the hypotenuse. Now, if this orbit
is bombarded with another electron whose root is (1+i) we see that the one electrons with
same spin (the mechanics of this is more elaborate) already in place is pushed towards the
nucleus and the weak force pushes the one with the similar spin out from 0 in Sine formation.
This is mathematically equivalent to (1+i) being added to 0 which is (1+i)(1- i) and giving
result of (1+i),
ie; ((1+i)(1- i))+(1+i)=(1+i) whose modulus is √2 and at an angle of 45o which traces the Sine
wave visible in the Proof for Riemann’s Hypothesis.
Note:[Ref. David Wells]
Consider a square with side ‘a’. Construct another square with side ‘b’ at the right top corner
of the original square. The area formed by the four squares is given by the Binomial equation,
a 2 + 2 ab + b2 (We can consider here a = b for symmetry)
This is like the Sine function, (a+b)2=a2+b2+2ac.Sine(ө)
Rearranging we get, a2+b2=(a+b)2-2ac.Sine(ө)
We can see that the right hand side can be written as (a+ib)(a-ib) which is the roots of the
equation a f ”(x)+ b f ’(x) + c, where a=b=c
Now if we keep constructing these smaller squares on the corners and elsewhere we see a
grid forming like the space-time continuum, each square representing a time factor made up
of smaller differential equations. We may be able to continue from here to hypothesis about,
time-warps, and dynamics of space time continuum, organization of nucleus which the
Calabi-Yau topology, time cones, super strings leading to fundamentals of time. We can
assume the net like fabric of space time continuum enclosing the circle which is the
generating circle for time, the movement of the roots of this ellipse creating time. It should be
noticed later that Riemann’s conjuncture leads us to this hypothesis.

Note:
In Non-Linear dynamics of forced oscillations this can be the precursor for Poincare Sections,
described by “Browers Fixed point theorem”[Ref.Ian Stewert].
Now going further in a different direction,
The above equation can be written as f ”(x)+f ’(x)+c=ln(x)--------(a1)
The second order of the equation is due to the fact that the Log function has one inflexion
point and so second order differential equation in t-domain.

Inverting the above differential equation,

Note: A doubt can arise where inversion of function above is consistent like
1/2+1/2 ≠ 1/4 but 1.
It should be noted that here the function is not Algebraic meaning variables like a and b are
involved but Calculus constant terms and relational motions are involved, where a choice of
proper “c” term can create consistency of inversion for the particular equation chosen. An
attempt to elucidate a closed form equation from the dynamical Log function for the Riemann
Zeta function is successfully achieved with the “c” constant term chosen so as to make the
reciprocal consistent with the dynamic Log equation derived from Taylor series expansion of
Log series. The results achieved at the end Table is an proof of the above argument. This
gives as a theorem that “inversion can be consistent in dynamic equations if the constant term
is appropriately chosen to make the inversion consistent”. This makes it valid too since the
table appears consistent with the Riemann Zeta function prediction. Please refer to the
choosing of ‘c’ later on in transformation, where even a Fibionnaci number appears making
this very interesting.
1/f ”(x)+1/f ’(x)+1/c= 1/Ln(x)
Integrating,
∫1/f”(x)+ ∫ 1/f’(x)+∫1/c= ∫1/ln(x)--------------(1)
Now, f(x)=ln(x),
F’(x)=1/x and f”(x)= -1/x2-------------------------------(2)
Substituting (2) in (1)
∫-x2+∫x+∫1/c=∫1/ln(x)
[-x3/3+x2/2+x/c=∫1/ln(x) ------------------------(3)
(Ref. Heidelbrand.)
Here we see that c = 0.546 when x=2
Also c=0.546=ln√3 for Equation (1).

Now for x=1, Equation(3) become,

-13/3+12/2+1/0.546=2
for x=2, Equation (3) becomes
-8/3+4/2+2/0.546=3,
And for x= 0.5, Equation (3) becomes
-0.53+0.52+(0.5/0.546)=1
This is the first 3 numbers 0.5, 1 and 2 of table given below chosen for accuracy.
This shows that there is 1 prime number which is 0 before 0.5, 2 Prime numbers before 1
which are 0 and 1 itself and 3 prime numbers before 2 which are 0,1 and 2.
Now Riemann’s conjuncture that.
0.5
∫ 1/ln(x)=0=(2-1)-(3-2) integrating by taking intermediate limit 1, between 0.5 and 2
2
Thus the area under the Riemann ξ function between 0.5 and 2 is 0.

Note: It is interesting to note that we get the value of the area directly without using the
Cauchy-Riemann Integration.
Note:
Consider the Log function in Cartesian x-y co-ordinates.
∫ 1/Ln(x) = ∫ d Ln(ln(x))/dx
= d Ln(mx+c)/dx where ‘m’ is the slope of the line passing through y = Ln(x) or the
function of the line in slope-intercept form where m= Ln(x)/x
Ie;∫ 1/Ln(x) = ∫ 1/(mx+c) = (m/(mx+c)2).m+k.x=m2/(mx+c)2 +kx
This can be simplified as ∫ 1/Ln(x)= Sin(x)+k.x
Equating Sin(x)+k.x=( x/Ln(x))√Ф
Simplifying,
k= ( x.√Ф – Ln(x).(Sin(x)=√3/2))/(x.Ln(x)), only in this equation Sin(x)=√3/2 in others just
Sine(x).
Substituting this in Equation ∫1/ln(x)=Sin(x)+k.x, will produce the same results got from the
above differential equation solutions for Riemann ξ function like area between 0.5 and 2.
Only consideration is one need to use Cauchys Principal number method to get the area from
this equation. But it may be difficult to prove the non-trivial root part of the Riemann ξ
function method from this method.
The following table gives the results of Riemann ξ function from the formula derived from
slope of the line connecting origin to the ξ point.

Number Actual Primes Calculated Primes from slope fn

2 3 3.6
8 4 4.9
14 6 6.8
20 8 8.6
26 9 10
33 11 12
1000 168 178

which proves Riemann’s conjuncture.

Note:Now for numbers beyond 2 we simplify equation (3) as follows
[(-x3/3+x2/2+ x/c) - (-x3/3+x2/2)] = ∫1/ln(x), where c = ln(x)/√φ and φ is the Fibionacci
Number 1.61. c is got by substituting Equation(a1) into Equation (3)
So,
Now take Equation (a1) directly as the Riemann ξ function, because, this route too produce
results of the Table given below.
F”(x)+f’(x)+c =∫1/ln(x), since f(x) is taken to be ln(x) and so f”x= -1/x and f’(x)=1/x. and
c=(x/ln(x))√φ

The above equation for elliptical function can be written as,

F”(x)+f’(x)+xSine β=∫1/ln(x) where,
β = Sin-1(√φ/ln(x))
where Sin(β) gives the percentage of Primes before any number “x”, which is given in Table
below.
Now take f”(x)+f’(x)+c=∫1/Ln(x) and expanding taking x= ln(x), we get Equation(4).
This is to establish that a two dimensional equation circle is equivalent to a three dimensional
circle which is a sphere and a three dimensional sphere is equivalent to a 4 dimensional
sphere or hypersphere which is the Poincare conjuncture.
.Now continuing with “c”
-1/x+1/x+(x/ln(x))√φ =∫1/ln(x)-----------------------------(4)
Also, Equation(3)=Equation(4)
ie; -x3/3+x2/2+x/c= (x/ln(x))√φ =∫ 1/ln(x)------------------(5)
Note:
 Here we see that the cubic equation(3) is equivalent to the two dimensional
equation(4)(two dimensional because of the presence of log function in equation(4)) which is
the proof for Poincare conjuncture which conjures that a three dimensional sphere is
equivalent to its two dimensional counterpart a circle and is also equivalent to a four
dimensional sphere. Our three dimensional sphere has a fourth dimension of time since its
roots are complex, which proves the Poincare conjuncture from our relation of equivalence of
Equation(3) and Equation(4) (Ref.Derbyshare)

Simplifying the above equation we get

(-2x3c+3x2c+6x) / 6c = (x/ln(x))√φ
And, x/c= ((x√φ / ln(x)) / ln(x)) + ((2x3 - 3x2)/6)
= (6x√φ + (2x3- 3x2)ln(x)) / 6ln(x)
There for,
c= (6x.ln(x)) / (6x.√φ + (2x3 - 3x2)ln(x))-------------------(6)

Substituting in Equation(3), c from (6),

-(x3/3)+(x2/2)+ ((6x.ln(x)) / (6x.√φ + (2x3 - 3x2)ln(x)))
Simplifying the above Equation, we get,
(-2x3+3x2+36.Ln(x))/(-18.Ln(x).x3+12Ln(x).x2+45.72x)
These are 2 Cubic Equations in Numerator and Denominator. By Synthetic Division on them
separately we get their roots and simplified Equation(3) as,
((x+3)(x+36)((-x+(x.Ln(x))/(x+3)) divided by,
((x+1.5)(x+18Ln(x).x2)(x-(45.72x/(x+1.5)))----------------(7)
That is equation(7)=((190)(-1.72))/((183.4)(-2.5)) ≈ 1, showing Eq(3)=Eq(4), which again
confirms and proves Poincare conjuncture, confirming both our direction as correct, in
integrating the reciprocals to get the Riemann Zeta function.

The Table is the values of Riemann Li(x) calculated from above Equation(3), and
Equation(4) (from 2 onwards) along with actual values of ξ function found from inspection
from numbers selected randomly
between, 0.5 and 90.

X Actual Primes Riemann Li(x) calculated %prime before “x”

0.5 1
1 2
2 3
5 5 4.14 80%
10 6 5.666 60%
20 9 8.6175 45%
30 10 11.3522 33.3%
80 22 23.4523 27.5%
90 27 25.6904 30%
1000 168 180 16.8%

Note: The above numbers show us that the errors are less than 10% the errors that are
acceptable in Engineering standards for control of systems and environment.

Now, the second part of Riemann Hypothesis proof.

We can see that the differential equation,

d2 y/dx2+dy/dx+(x/ln(x))√φ=∫1/ln(x) between limits 2 and n---------------(4) is Equation (1)
without loss of generality, where φ=1.61 which is the Fibionacci Number.
Even, Equation(1) can give the same meaning since that is also a differential equation of the
Elliptical form.

Since here a=1 and b =1 in the differential equation(4) the roots will be (b+/-√b2-4ac)/2a.
So it is (1+/-√1-4c)/2= 1/2 +/- √1-4c/2 where we see that the roots are complex and if we
vary c from 1 to infinity and changing ‘a’ and ‘b’ proportionately we get infinite number of
complex roots with real part at ½.
Eg; 1)2 d2y/dx2+2 dy/dx+ (2/ln(x))√φ whose trivial root again is ½
Ie; (2+/√(22-4x2xc))/2x2 where the trivial part is ½+/-i(√22-4x2xc)/4, where
c=((2/ln2))√φ
2) 3d2y/dx2+3dy/dx+(3 +/-√32-4x3xc)/3x2= ½+/-i(√32-4x3xc)/6
.
.
.
99)99d2y/dx2+99dy/dx+(99+/-√992-4x99xc)=99/2x99+/- √992-4x99xc)/2x99=1/2+/-i(√992-
4x99xc)/2x99
.
.
.
And so on till infinity(∞) when we create different equations changing a=b=3 or even equal
fractions, till ∞, where c =(x/ln(x))√φ
½ is seen to be remaining constant for all roots only complex part varying. So all the roots of
Riemann ξ function lie on the complex plane at ½ from a small value to

infinity. We already, proved that ½ is a root of Riemann ξ function and the differential
equation supplements it and also proves the Hypothesis with the Elliptical function and hence
Homogeneous differential equation . The fact is Elliptical functions will have it’s roots in
Complex number form. The equal constants of the differential equation shows that the
Riemann Zeta function is an Elliptical function and so as described above all it’s trivial roots
must be ½ and all non-trivial roots lie on ½ plane up to infinity. Thus proved Riemann
Hypothesis.

Conclusion: Riemann’s conjuncture was that the real part of the root is ½ when s=2 which
remain proved and the Zeta function gives the number of Primes before the value x used for
ascertaining it at any time which we proved for 0.5,1 and2 to be 1,2 and 3. We also proved
the Riemann Hypothesis that all complex roots of Riemann ξ function lie on the complex
plane at ½(Ref:Clawson)

References:
[1] “Does God play Dice”, Prof. Ian Stewert, Penguin

[2] “God Created Integers” Prof. Stephen Hawkings PP 618, Penguin

[3]“Mysteries of Mathematics” Prof. Calvin Clawson

[4] “Theory of Higher Functions”, Prof. Heidelbrand, Prentice Hall

[5] ”The trouble with Physics”, Prof. Lee Smolin, Pnguin

[6] ”The Quantum World”, Prof. Kenneth W. Ford, Harvard Uni. Press

[7]“Unknown Quantity”, Prof. John Derbyshire, Atlantic Books

 [8] “You are a mathematician”, Prof. David Wells, Penguin

Mathew Cherian B.E, MBA(Western Michigan University)

3-B Tranquil Residency
Kochin 682021
India.
Email:mathewcherian@inbox.com