Namespaces
Variants
Actions

Difference between revisions of "Talk:Lindelöf hypothesis"

From Encyclopedia of Mathematics
Jump to: navigation, search
(Thank you)
(Would you like to correct the article yourself?)
Line 2: Line 2:
  
 
:Thank you! We'll think. Be welcome. And please sign your messages (on talk pages) by four tildas: <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>. [[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] ([[User talk:Boris Tsirelson|talk]]) 10:14, 7 December 2014 (CET)
 
:Thank you! We'll think. Be welcome. And please sign your messages (on talk pages) by four tildas: <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>. [[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] ([[User talk:Boris Tsirelson|talk]]) 10:14, 7 December 2014 (CET)
 +
:Would you like to correct the article yourself (by replacing the wrong reference, or/and otherwise)?
 +
:And by the way, S.Albeverio and Y.Cheng (and J.Wang?) claim to prove this hypothesis (arXiv:1010.3374; rumored to be submitted to Acta Arithmetica 2013). Any comments?

Revision as of 18:28, 7 December 2014

The first reference of Voronin's article is false; nothing on the Lindelöf hypothesis is in "Le calcul des résidus et ses applications à la théorie des fonctions". And this is obvious: Lindelöf 's book publish date is 1905, and the Lindelöf 's artticle on the hypothesis is "Quelques remarques sur la croissance de la fonction zêta(s)", Bull. des sciences mathématiques, série 2, vol. 32, 1908. Claude Henri Picard

Thank you! We'll think. Be welcome. And please sign your messages (on talk pages) by four tildas: ~~~~. Boris Tsirelson (talk) 10:14, 7 December 2014 (CET)
Would you like to correct the article yourself (by replacing the wrong reference, or/and otherwise)?
And by the way, S.Albeverio and Y.Cheng (and J.Wang?) claim to prove this hypothesis (arXiv:1010.3374; rumored to be submitted to Acta Arithmetica 2013). Any comments?
How to Cite This Entry:
Lindelöf hypothesis. Encyclopedia of Mathematics. URL: http://encyclopediaofmath.org/index.php?title=Lindel%C3%B6f_hypothesis&oldid=35439