Future

Cover image for A Proof of the Riemann Hypothesis
Frank Vega
Frank Vega

Posted on • Edited on

A Proof of the Riemann Hypothesis

From Chebyshev to Primorials: Establishing the Riemann Hypothesis

Frank Vega
Information Physics Institute, 840 W 67th St, Hialeah, FL 33012, USA
vega.frank@gmail.com
ORCID: 0000-0001-8210-4126


Abstract

The Riemann Hypothesis, one of the most celebrated open problems in mathematics, addresses the location of the non-trivial zeros of the Riemann zeta function and their profound connection to the distribution of prime numbers. Since Riemann's original formulation in 1859, countless approaches have attempted to establish its truth, often by examining the asymptotic behavior of arithmetic functions such as Chebyshev's function ΞΈ(x)\theta(x) .

In this work, we introduce a new criterion that links the hypothesis to the comparative growth of ΞΈ(x)\theta(x) and primorial numbers. By analyzing this relationship, we demonstrate that the Riemann Hypothesis follows from intrinsic properties of ΞΈ(x)\theta(x) when measured against the structure of primorials. This perspective highlights a striking equivalence between the distribution of primes and the analytic behavior of ΞΆ(s)\zeta(s) , reinforcing the deep interplay between multiplicative number theory and analytic inequalities.

Keywords: Riemann Hypothesis; Riemann zeta function; prime numbers; Chebyshev function

MSC: 11M26, 11A25, 11A41, 11N37


1. Introduction

The Riemann Hypothesis, first proposed by Bernhard Riemann in 1859, asserts that all non-trivial zeros of the Riemann zeta function ΞΆ(s)\zeta(s) lie on the critical line β„œ(s)=12\Re(s) = \frac{1}{2} . Widely regarded as the foremost unsolved problem in pure mathematics, it forms a central part of Hilbert's eighth problem and is one of the Clay Mathematics Institute's Millennium Prize Problems [CO16].

The zeta function ΞΆ(s)\zeta(s) , defined over the complex plane, possesses trivial zeros at the negative even integers and non-trivial zeros elsewhere. Riemann's conjecture concerns these non-trivial zeros, predicting that their real part is always 12\frac{1}{2} . Far from being a purely theoretical curiosity, the hypothesis has profound implications for the distribution of prime numbers, a subject with fundamental importance in both theory and computation.

Main Result

In this work, we establish the hypothesis by introducing a criterion based on the comparative growth of Chebyshev's ΞΈ\theta -function and primorial numbers. Specifically, we show that for every sufficiently large prime pnp_n , there exists a larger prime pnβ€²p_{n'} such that the ratio R(Nnβ€²)R(N_{n'}) , defined via the Dedekind Ξ¨\Psi -function and primorials, satisfies R(Nnβ€²)<R(Nn)R(N_{n'}) < R(N_n) .

Reformulating this condition in terms of logarithmic deviations of ΞΈ(x)\theta(x) and applying bounds on the Chebyshev function, we prove that

log⁑(ΞΈ(pnβ€²))log⁑(ΞΈ(pn))>∏pn<p≀pnβ€²(1+1p) \frac{\log (\theta(p_{n'}))}{\log (\theta(p_n))} > \prod_{p_n < p \leq p_{n'}} \left(1 + \frac{1}{p}\right)

By our key insight (Lemma 2), this inequality is equivalent to the Riemann Hypothesis, thereby confirming the conjecture.


2. Background and Ancillary Results

In analytic number theory, several classical functions encode deep information about the distribution of prime numbers. Among these, the Chebyshev function, the Riemann zeta function, and the Dedekind Ξ¨\Psi function play a central role.

2.1 The Chebyshev Function

The Chebyshev function ΞΈ(x)\theta(x) is defined by

ΞΈ(x)=βˆ‘p≀xlog⁑p \theta(x) = \sum_{p \leq x} \log p

where the sum extends over all primes p≀xp \leq x . This function provides a natural measure of the cumulative contribution of primes up to xx and is closely tied to the prime number theorem.

2.2 The Riemann Zeta Function

The Riemann zeta function at s=2s=2 is given by

ΞΆ(2)=βˆ‘n=1∞1n2 \zeta(2) = \sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{1}{n^2}

Proposition 1. The value of the Riemann zeta function at s=2s=2 satisfies

ΞΆ(2)=∏k=1∞pk2pk2βˆ’1=Ο€26 \zeta(2) = \prod_{k=1}^\infty \frac{p_k^2}{p_k^2 - 1} = \frac{\pi^2}{6}

where pkp_k denotes the kk -th prime number [AY74].

2.3 The Dedekind Ξ¨ Function and Primorials

For a natural number nn , the Dedekind Ξ¨\Psi function is defined as

Ξ¨(n)=nβ‹…βˆp∣n(1+1p) \Psi(n) = n \cdot \prod_{p \mid n} \left(1 + \frac{1}{p}\right)

where the product runs over all prime divisors of nn .

The kk -th primorial, denoted NkN_k , is

Nk=∏i=1kpi N_k = \prod_{i=1}^k p_i

the product of the first kk primes.

We further define, for nβ‰₯3n \geq 3 :

R(n)=Ξ¨(n)nβ‹…log⁑log⁑n R(n) = \frac{\Psi(n)}{n \cdot \log \log n}

For the nn -th prime pnp_n , we say that the condition Dedekind(pn)\mathsf{Dedekind}(p_n) holds if

∏p≀pn(1+1p)>eΞ³ΞΆ(2)β‹…log⁑θ(pn) \prod_{p \leq p_n} \left(1 + \frac{1}{p}\right) > \frac{e^\gamma}{\zeta(2)} \cdot \log \theta(p_n)

where Ξ³\gamma is the Euler–Mascheroni constant. Equivalently, Dedekind(pn)\mathsf{Dedekind}(p_n) holds if and only if

R(Nn)>eΞ³ΞΆ(2) R(N_n) > \frac{e^\gamma}{\zeta(2)}

Proposition 2. If the Riemann Hypothesis is false (see [Val23]), then there exist infinitely many nn such that

R(Nn)<eΞ³ΞΆ(2) R(N_n) < \frac{e^\gamma}{\zeta(2)}

Proposition 3. As kβ†’βˆžk \to \infty (see [SOL11]), the sequence R(Nk)R(N_k) converges to

lim⁑kβ†’βˆžR(Nk)=eΞ³ΞΆ(2) \lim_{k \to \infty} R(N_k) = \frac{e^\gamma}{\zeta(2)}

Together, these results establish the analytic framework for our proof. By examining the interplay between Chebyshev's function and primorial numbers, we reveal how the non-trivial zeros of the zeta function are constrained by prime distribution.


3. Main Result

Lemma 1 (Key Finding)

Let α>1\alpha > 1 be fixed. Then there exists N∈NN \in \mathbb{N} such that for all n>Nn > N there is an integer ii with

log⁑θ(pn+i)log⁑θ(pn)>∏pn<p≀pn+i(1+1p) \frac{\log \theta(p_{n+i})}{\log \theta(p_n)} > \prod_{p_n < p \leq p_{n+i}} \left(1 + \frac{1}{p}\right)

Proof

The argument proceeds by choosing ii in terms of Ξ±\alpha and comparing the asymptotic behavior of both sides.

Step 1. Reduction of the product.

We use the identity

∏pn<p≀pn+i(1+1p)=∏pn<p≀pn+i(1βˆ’1p2)∏pn<p≀pn+i(1βˆ’1p) \prod_{p_n < p \leq p_{n+i}} \left(1 + \frac{1}{p}\right) = \frac{\prod_{p_n < p \leq p_{n+i}} \left(1 - \frac{1}{p^2}\right)}{\prod_{p_n < p \leq p_{n+i}} \left(1 - \frac{1}{p}\right)}

Thus it suffices to prove

log⁑θ(pn+i)log⁑θ(pn)β‹…βˆpn<p≀pn+i(1βˆ’1p)>∏pn<p≀pn+i(1βˆ’1p2) \frac{\log \theta(p_{n+i})}{\log \theta(p_n)} \cdot \prod_{p_n < p \leq p_{n+i}} \left(1 - \frac{1}{p}\right) > \prod_{p_n < p \leq p_{n+i}} \left(1 - \frac{1}{p^2}\right)

Step 2. Choice of ii .

Fix Ξ±>1\alpha > 1 . For each nn , let ii be chosen so that pn+ip_{n+i} is the largest prime with

pn+i≀pnΞ± p_{n+i} \leq p_n^\alpha

As nβ†’βˆžn \to \infty , this ensures pn+i∼pnΞ±p_{n+i} \sim p_n^\alpha .

Step 3. Growth of the logarithmic ratio.

By the Prime Number Theorem, θ(x)∼x\theta(x) \sim x [PT16]. Hence

lim⁑nβ†’βˆžlog⁑θ(pn+i)log⁑θ(pn)=lim⁑nβ†’βˆžlog⁑pn+ilog⁑pn=lim⁑nβ†’βˆžlog⁑(pnΞ±)log⁑pn=Ξ± \lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{\log \theta(p_{n+i})}{\log \theta(p_n)} = \lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{\log p_{n+i}}{\log p_n} = \lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{\log(p_n^\alpha)}{\log p_n} = \alpha

Thus, for large nn , this ratio is arbitrarily close to Ξ±\alpha .

Step 4. Behavior of the Euler product factor.

We rewrite

∏pn<p≀pn+i(1βˆ’1p)=∏p≀pn+i(1βˆ’1p)∏p≀pn(1βˆ’1p) \prod_{p_n < p \leq p_{n+i}} \left(1 - \frac{1}{p}\right) = \frac{\prod_{p \leq p_{n+i}} \left(1 - \frac{1}{p}\right)}{\prod_{p \leq p_n} \left(1 - \frac{1}{p}\right)}

By Mertens' theorem [Mer74],

∏p≀x(1βˆ’1p)∼eβˆ’Ξ³log⁑x \prod_{p \leq x} \left(1 - \frac{1}{p}\right) \sim \frac{e^{-\gamma}}{\log x}

Therefore,

lim⁑nβ†’βˆžβˆp≀pn+i(1βˆ’1p)∏p≀pn(1βˆ’1p)=lim⁑nβ†’βˆžlog⁑pnlog⁑pn+i=1Ξ± \lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{\prod_{p \leq p_{n+i}} \left(1 - \frac{1}{p}\right)}{\prod_{p \leq p_n} \left(1 - \frac{1}{p}\right)} = \lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{\log p_n}{\log p_{n+i}} = \frac{1}{\alpha}

So for large nn , this product is arbitrarily close to 1/Ξ±1/\alpha .

Step 5. Contribution of the squared terms.

From explicit bounds (see [Nic22]), for pn>24317p_n > 24317 one has

βˆ’1pnβ‹…log⁑pn+1pnβ‹…log⁑2pnβˆ’2pnβ‹…log⁑3pn+2pnβ‹…log⁑4pnβ‰€βˆ‘pn≀plog⁑(1βˆ’1p2)β‰€βˆ’1pnβ‹…log⁑pn+1pnβ‹…log⁑2pnβˆ’2pnβ‹…log⁑3pn+10.26pnβ‹…log⁑4pn -\frac{1}{p_{n} \cdot \log p_{n}} + \frac{1}{p_{n} \cdot \log^2 p_{n}} - \frac{2}{p_{n} \cdot \log^3 p_{n}} + \frac{2}{p_{n} \cdot \log^4 p_{n}} \leq \sum_{p_n \leq p} \log \left(1 - \frac{1}{p^2}\right) \leq -\frac{1}{p_{n} \cdot \log p_{n}} + \frac{1}{p_{n} \cdot \log^2 p_{n}} - \frac{2}{p_{n} \cdot \log^3 p_{n}} + \frac{10.26}{p_{n} \cdot \log^4 p_{n}}

In particular,

βˆ‘pn<p≀pn+ilog⁑(1βˆ’1p2)βˆΌβˆ’1pnlog⁑pn \sum_{p_n < p \leq p_{n+i}} \log \left(1 - \frac{1}{p^2}\right) \sim -\frac{1}{p_n \log p_n}

as iβ†’βˆži \to \infty .

Step 6. Final comparison.

Taking logarithms of both sides of the desired inequality, the left-hand side approaches

log⁑(Ξ±β‹…1Ξ±)=0 \log\left(\alpha \cdot \frac{1}{\alpha}\right) = 0

while the right-hand side is asymptotic to βˆ’1/(pnlog⁑pn)-1/(p_n \log p_n) , which is strictly negative. Hence, for sufficiently large nn , the inequality holds.

Step 7. Conclusion.

Thus, for every α>1\alpha > 1 there exists NN such that for all n>Nn > N the inequality is satisfied for the chosen ii . ∎


Lemma 2 (Main Insight)

The Riemann Hypothesis holds provided that, for some sufficiently large prime pnp_n , there exists a larger prime pnβ€²>pnp_{n'} > p_n such that

R(Nnβ€²)<R(Nn) R(N_{n'}) < R(N_n)

Proof

Suppose, for contradiction, that the Riemann Hypothesis is false. We will show that this assumption is incompatible with the asymptotic behavior of the sequence R(Nk)R(N_k) .

Step 1. Existence of a starting point.

If the Riemann Hypothesis is false, Proposition 2 guarantees the existence of infinitely many indices nn such that

R(Nn)<eΞ³ΞΆ(2) R(N_n) < \frac{e^\gamma}{\zeta(2)}

Choose one such index n1n_1 corresponding to a prime pn1p_{n_1} .

Step 2. Iterative construction.

By the hypothesis of the lemma, whenever R(Nn)<eΞ³ΞΆ(2)R(N_n) < \frac{e^\gamma}{\zeta(2)} there exists a larger prime pnβ€²>pnp_{n'} > p_n with

R(Nnβ€²)<R(Nn) R(N_{n'}) < R(N_n)

Applying this iteratively starting from n1n_1 , we obtain an infinite increasing sequence of indices

n1<n2<n3<β‹― n_1 < n_2 < n_3 < \cdots

such that

R(Nni+1)<R(Nni)forΒ allΒ iβ‰₯1 R(N_{n_{i+1}}) < R(N_{n_i}) \quad \text{for all } i \geq 1

Thus the subsequence {R(Nni)}\{R(N_{n_i})\} is strictly decreasing and bounded above by eΞ³ΞΆ(2)\frac{e^\gamma}{\zeta(2)} .

Step 3. Contradiction with the limit.

By Proposition 3, we know that

lim⁑kβ†’βˆžR(Nk)=eΞ³ΞΆ(2) \lim_{k \to \infty} R(N_k) = \frac{e^\gamma}{\zeta(2)}

Hence, for any Ξ΅>0\varepsilon > 0 , there exists KK such that for all k>Kk > K ,

∣R(Nk)βˆ’eΞ³ΞΆ(2)∣<Ξ΅ \left| R(N_k) - \frac{e^\gamma}{\zeta(2)} \right| < \varepsilon

Take

Ξ΅=eΞ³ΞΆ(2)βˆ’R(Nn1)>0 \varepsilon = \frac{e^\gamma}{\zeta(2)} - R(N_{n_1}) > 0

By convergence, only finitely many terms of {R(Nk)}\{R(N_k)\} can lie below eΞ³ΞΆ(2)βˆ’Ξ΅\frac{e^\gamma}{\zeta(2)} - \varepsilon . However, the subsequence {R(Nni)}\{R(N_{n_i})\} is infinite and satisfies

R(Nni)<eΞ³ΞΆ(2)βˆ’Ξ΅forΒ allΒ iβ‰₯1 R(N_{n_i}) < \frac{e^\gamma}{\zeta(2)} - \varepsilon \quad \text{for all } i \geq 1

a contradiction.

Step 4. Conclusion.

This contradiction shows that the assumption that the Riemann Hypothesis is false cannot hold. Therefore, under the stated condition on R(Nn)R(N_n) , the Riemann Hypothesis must be true. ∎


Theorem (Main Theorem)

The Riemann Hypothesis is true.

Proof

By Lemma 2, the Riemann Hypothesis holds if, for some sufficiently large prime pnp_n , there exists a larger prime pnβ€²>pnp_{n'} > p_n such that

R(Nnβ€²)<R(Nn) R(N_{n'}) < R(N_n)

We now show that this condition is equivalent to a certain logarithmic inequality.

Step 1. Expression for R(Nk)R(N_k) .

For the kk -th primorial Nk=∏i=1kpiN_k = \prod_{i=1}^k p_i , we have

R(Nk)=Ψ(Nk)Nklog⁑log⁑Nk=∏i=1k(1+1pi)log⁑log⁑Nk R(N_k) = \frac{\Psi(N_k)}{N_k \log \log N_k} = \frac{\prod_{i=1}^k \left(1 + \frac{1}{p_i}\right)}{\log \log N_k}

Since ΞΈ(pk)=βˆ‘i=1klog⁑pi=log⁑Nk\theta(p_k) = \sum_{i=1}^k \log p_i = \log N_k , it follows that

log⁑log⁑Nk=log⁑θ(pk) \log \log N_k = \log \theta(p_k)

Thus,

R(Nk)=∏i=1k(1+1pi)log⁑θ(pk) R(N_k) = \frac{\prod_{i=1}^k \left(1 + \frac{1}{p_i}\right)}{\log \theta(p_k)}

Step 2. Reformulating the inequality.

The condition R(Nnβ€²)<R(Nn)R(N_{n'}) < R(N_n) is equivalent to

∏i=1nβ€²(1+1pi)log⁑θ(pnβ€²)<∏i=1n(1+1pi)log⁑θ(pn) \frac{\prod_{i=1}^{n'} \left(1 + \frac{1}{p_i}\right)}{\log \theta(p_{n'})} < \frac{\prod_{i=1}^{n} \left(1 + \frac{1}{p_i}\right)}{\log \theta(p_n)}

Rearranging gives

log⁑θ(pnβ€²)log⁑θ(pn)>∏i=1nβ€²(1+1pi)∏i=1n(1+1pi)=∏pn<p≀pnβ€²(1+1p) \frac{\log \theta(p_{n'})}{\log \theta(p_n)} > \frac{\prod_{i=1}^{n'} \left(1 + \frac{1}{p_i}\right)}{\prod_{i=1}^{n} \left(1 + \frac{1}{p_i}\right)} = \prod_{p_n < p \leq p_{n'}} \left(1 + \frac{1}{p}\right)

Hence the inequality is equivalent to

log⁑θ(pnβ€²)log⁑θ(pn)>∏pn<p≀pnβ€²(1+1p) \frac{\log \theta(p_{n'})}{\log \theta(p_n)} > \prod_{p_n < p \leq p_{n'}} \left(1 + \frac{1}{p}\right)

Step 3. Conclusion.

By Lemma 1, this inequality holds for sufficiently large pnp_n . Therefore, for such pnp_n there exists pnβ€²>pnp_{n'} > p_n with R(Nnβ€²)<R(Nn)R(N_{n'}) < R(N_n) . By Lemma 2, this implies the Riemann Hypothesis. ∎


4. Conclusion

This work confirms the Riemann Hypothesis by linking it to the comparative growth of Chebyshev's function and primorial numbers. The result secures the long-standing conjecture that all non-trivial zeros of the zeta function lie on the critical line, thereby providing the strongest possible understanding of prime distribution.

Its implications extend well beyond number theory: it validates decades of conditional results, sharpens error terms in the Prime Number Theorem, and strengthens the theoretical foundations of computational mathematics and cryptography. More broadly, the resolution of the Hypothesis highlights the remarkable coherence of mathematics, where deep properties of primes, analytic functions, and asymptotic inequalities converge to settle one of the most profound questions in the discipline.


References

  • [AY74] Ayoub, R. (1974). Euler and the Zeta Function. The American Mathematical Monthly, 81(10), 1067–1086. https://doi.org/10.2307/2319041

  • [CO16] Connes, A. (2016). An Essay on the Riemann Hypothesis. In Open Problems in Mathematics (pp. 225–257). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32162-2_5

  • [Mer74] Mertens, F. (1874). Ein Beitrag zur analytischen Zahlentheorie. Journal fΓΌr die reine und angewandte Mathematik, 78, 46–62. https://doi.org/10.1515/crll.1874.78.46

  • [Nic22] Nicolas, J.-L. (2022). The sum of divisors function and the Riemann hypothesis. The Ramanujan Journal, 58, 1113–1157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11139-021-00491-y

  • [PT16] Platt, D. J., & Trudgian, T. S. (2016). On the first sign change of ΞΈ(x)βˆ’x\theta(x) - x . Mathematics of Computation, 85(299), 1539–1547. https://doi.org/10.1090/mcom/3021

  • [SOL11] SolΓ©, P., & Planat, M. (2011). Extreme values of the Dedekind Ξ¨\Psi function. Journal of Combinatorics and Number Theory, 3(1), 33–38.

  • [Val23] Carpi, A., & D'Alonzo, V. (2023). On the Riemann Hypothesis and the Dedekind Psi Function. Integers, 23.


MSC (2020): 11M26 (Nonreal zeros of ΞΆ(s)\zeta (s) and L(s,Ο‡)L(s, \chi) ); Riemann hypothesis), 11A25 (Arithmetic functions; related numbers; inversion formulas), 11A41 (Primes), 11N37 (Asymptotic results on arithmetic functions)


Documentation

Available as PDF at From Chebyshev to Primorials: Establishing the Riemann Hypothesis.

Top comments (0)