Funceq
Funceq
Kedlaya)
The functional equation for the Riemann zeta function
In this unit, we establish the functional equation property for the Riemann zeta function,
which will imply its meromorphic continuation to the entire complex plane. We will do
likewise for Dirichlet L-functions in the next unit.
for Re(s) > 0. It is then straightforward to check (by integration by parts) that
Using (1), we may extend ΓR to a meromorphic function on all of C, with simple poles at
∞
s = 0, −1, . . . . Since Γ(1) = 0 e−t dt = 1, we have that for n a nonnegative integer,
Γ(n + 1) = n!.
If we sum over n, we can interchange the sum and integral for Re(s) > 1 because the
sum-integral converges absolutely. Hence
Z ∞
π −s/2
Γ(s/2)ζ(s) = xs/2−1 ω(x) dx Re(s) > 1
0
for
X
∞
2 πx
ω(x) = e−n .
n=1
1
It is slightly more convenient to work with the function θ defined by
X
∞
2 πx
θ(x) = e−n ,
n=−∞
2
Remember that ζ(s) has no zeroes in the region Re(s) ≥ 1. By the functional equation,
in the region Re(s) ≤ 0, the only zeroes of ζ occur at the poles of Γ(s/2) (except for s = 0,
where the factor of s counters the pole), i.e., at negative even integers. These are called the
trivial zeroes of ζ; the other zeroes, which are forced to lie in the range 0 < Re(s) < 1, are
much more interesting!
it is uniformly continuous.
It is convenient to restrict attention to a smaller class of functions. We say f : R → C
is a Schwarz function if f is infinitely differentiable and, for each nonnegative integer n and
each c ∈ R, |f (n) (t)| = o(|t|c ) as t → ±∞.
then f[
? g(s) = fb(s)b
g (s).
Proof. Exercise.
3
Sketch of proof. One can give a simple proof using Fourier series; see exercises. Here I’ll
sketch a more direct approach which has some significance in analytic number theory; it is
a very simple version of the Hardy-Littlewood “circle method”.
Write
XN Z +∞ Xn
ˆ
f (n) = e−2πint f (t) dt
n=−N −∞ n=−N
X∞ Z m+1/N
e−2πiN t − e2πi(N +1)t
= f (t) dt
m=−∞ m−1/N 1 − e2πit
X
∞ Z m+1−1/N
e−2πiN t − e2πi(N +1)t
+ f (t) dt.
m=−∞ m+1/N 1 − e2πit
Then check that the summand in the first sum converges (uniformly on m) to f (m), while
the second summand converges (uniformly on m) to zero. (If you prefer, first use a partition
of unity to reduce to the case where f is supported on an interval like [−2/3, 2/3], so that
the sums over m become finite.)
The Poisson summation formula immediately yields (2) as soon as one checks that f (t) =
2
e−πt is invariant under the Fourier transform (see exercises): it then follows that the Fourier
transform of f (t) = e−πxt is fˆ(s) = x−1/2 e−πxs , and Poisson summation gives (2).
2 2
2.1 Asides
Our study of θ merely grazes the top of a very large iceberg. Here are three comments to
this effect.
A much more general version of θ was considered by Jacobi, in which he considered a
quadratic form Q(x1 , . . . , xm ) and formed the sum
X
θQ (x) = e−Q(n1 ,...,nm )πx ;
n1 ,...,nm ∈Z
4
Exercises
1. Rewrite the functional equation directly in terms of ζ(s) and ζ(1 − s).
3. Prove Lemma 1.
4. Prove the Poisson summation formula either by completing the sketch given above, or
by considering the Fourier series of the function
X
F (s) = f (s + m).
m∈Z
2
5. Prove that the function f (t) = e−πt is its own Fourier transform.