1. Introduction
The first result obtained (Theorem 1) shows that a linear bounded operator T strictly positive on a dense set S in a separable Hilbert space H, is injective. Equivalently, its null space does not contain non null elements: . In order to use it, we built a framework like in the multilevel (multigrid) techniques in which the problem of injectivity is moved on finite dimension subspaces allowing us to define numerical methods for dealing with.
The positivity of a linear bounded operator T on S, not null, ensures that the null space of T contains from S only the element 0, i.e., . Thus, a zero of T could be only in the difference set considering that a linear combination of and not null, is inside the difference set. Let observe that is non negative on the entire space making the method useful for any linear bounded operator provided that the operator is strict positive on the finite dimension subspaces of the family whose union is dense.
The idea is to consider the dense set in H be the union of a family F of finite dimension including subspaces , , once the positivity on each subspace from the family F will induce the positivity on the dense set. For obtaining the necessary criteria for injectivity, we will exploit the relationship between the orthogonal projections of the eligible elements; i.e., elements outside the dense set onto the family subspaces and the positivity parameters of the operator or its operator approximations on these subspaces.
Now, a linear bounded operator T positive on a finite dimension subspace is in fact strictly positive on it, i.e., there exists such that . Suppose T be positive in each subspace . If there exists such that for any then T is strict positive on the dense set S and, by Theorem 1 introduced below, . In this case is no need for further investigations.
If the sequence of the positivity parameters of T is not bounded, , we consider two directions to continue:
· involving the adjoint operator restrictions on the subspaces of the family, improving in the new context with Lemma 2 below the criteria introduced in [
1] or,
· considering a sequence of positive operator approximations on subspaces.
An inferior bound of the positivity parameters of operator approximations, ensures strict positivity of the operator on the dense set. Lemma 1 addresses this case. Both cases are analysed in the next paragraph.
The third paragraph is dedicated to analyse the dense set most appropriate for obtaining operator or operator approximations having sparse matrix representations on the finite dimension subspaces whose union is dense in .
In the last paragraph we showed that on these subspaces the operator used by Alcantara-Bode in [
2] has the sequence of positivity parameters bounded inferior and so, verifying the criteria introduced in the third paragraph. For minimising the volume of computations we choose in
the finite dimension subspaces spanned by indicator interval functions of the domain partitions, indicators having on each subspace disjoint support. And so, obtaining sparse matrix representations for the integral operator. The theory behind the numerical method follows.
2. Two Theorems on Injectivity
Let H be a separable Hilbert space and denote with the class of the linear bounded operators on H. If is positive on a dense set , i.e., not null, then T has no zeros in the dense set. Otherwise, if there exists such that then contradicts its positivity.
Follows: its ’eligible’ zeros are all in the difference set , i.e., . In our analysis we will take in consideration only the collection of eligible zeros that are on the unit sphere, without restricting the generality once for an element that is not null both w and are or are not together in .
Theorem 1. If is strictly positive on a dense set of a separable Hilbert space then T is injective, equivalently .
Proof.
The set is dense if its closure coincides with H. Then, if , for every there exists such that . Now, the (1) results as follows. If :
.
If instead, then:
.
Therefore, given
, for every
there exists
such that
Let
w be an eligible element from the unit sphere,
and take
.
Then there exists at least one element such that holds. From (1), ∣ 1 - showing that, for any choices of a sequence approximating w, , it verifies .
If is strict positive on S, then there exists such that , .
Suppose that there exists
and consider a sequence of approximations of
w,
that, as we showed, has its normed sequence converging in norm to 1. From the positivity of
T on dense set
S, follows:
With c=
, we obtain
. Then,
with
, contradicting its convergence
with
.
This occurs for any choice of the sequence of approximations of w, verifying
, when .
Thus , valid for any , proving the theorem because no zeros of T there are in S either.
Suppose that the dense set S is the result of an union of finite dimension subspaces of a family F: . It is not mandatory but will ease our proofs considering that the subspaces are including: .
Observation 1. Let be the normed residuum of element after its orthogonal projection onto . Then, with .
Proof.
Given , from the density of the set S in H there exists verifying , as per the observations made in the proof of the Theorem 1. Let be the coarsest subspace, i.e., with the smallest dimension, from the family of subspaces containing . Because the best approximation of u in is its orthogonal projection, we obtain
, valid for every , proving our assertion. Rewriting this, for for any with the orthogonal projection onto . □
Theorem 2.
Suppose that has a sequence of operator approximations on the dense set S, having the following properties:
i) with ,
ii) , .
If T is positive on S and there exists such that
iii)
then .
Proof.
Being positive on S, the operator does not have zeros in the dense set.
For , denoting the not null orthogonal projection over by , then on any subspace , 1 = . If there exists , , for it denoting we have from ii):
.
Estimating ,
= ,
we observe that because , (from i)) and, (from Observation 1). Now, from iii)
.
From Observation 1 we have . So,
.
The inequality is violated from a range , involving , valid for any supposed zero of T in E. Because T has no zeros in the dense set, . □
Let
be a Hilbert-Schmidt integral operator. A technique for obtaining approximations for
to verify i) was used in [
5], [
6]. When
,
are approximations of
on the subspaces of family
F obtained through a class of finite rank operators - that are orthogonal projection integral operators
, then from
, we obtain the property i). In the next paragraph we show that
is a collection of finite rank projection operators on a family of finite dimension subspaces (see [
5]) whose union is dense in
. Moreover, if the operator approximations
verifies ii), we can show that the operator
T is strictly positive on the dense set
S provided that their positivity parameters sequence is bounded.
Lemma 1. (Criteria for operator approximations).
If the finite rank approximations of a positive Hilbert-Schmidt integral operator verify the conditions ii) and iii) from Theorem 2, then is strictly positive on the dense set.
Proof.
From the convergence to zero of the sequence there exists a parameter such that , corresponding to a subspace . This parameter is independent of any and, because of the inclusion property, for any we have . We could consider to be discarding a finite number of subspaces or, we could consider v to be inside of . Then:
for , resulting .
For an arbitrary there exists a coarser subspace (i.e., with a smaller dimension) , for which . For it, with we have:
. Since is positive on ,
.
Because T and are positive on , the inner product in the right side of the inequality is real valued and, .
So, if , then . From , follows:
.
Now, if , then .
Thus, taking , for any we obtain
, i.e., is strict positive on the dense set S. □
Corollary. If is an Hermitian Hilbert-Schmidt operator verifying on a dense set S the properties ii) and iii) from Theorem 2, then Q is injective.
Proof.
Being Hermitian, the operator verifies , for every . Being Hilbert-Schmidt it could be approximated on a dense family of finite dimension subspaces, its sequence of operator approximations verifying i). Then,
for any . Following the steps from the proof of Lemma 1 we obtain that:
meaning that Q is strictly positive on the dense set. Thus, due to Theorem 1/Lemma 1, we obtain . □
Now, reformulating the injectivity criteria introduced in [
1], we have the following lemma, useful when a sequence of operator approximations could not be obtained.
Lemma 2. (Criteria for operator restrictions.)
Let positive on the subspaces whose union S is a dense set S, verifying: for every , where with . Consider now the parameters:
where verifies .
If exists such that for every , then .
Proof.
Suppose that there exists , and let its orthogonal projection on . Then, denoting with , we obtain from the (strict) positivity of T on each of the subspaces (as in (2)),
Rewriting,
that is a contradiction from a range . Thus, . Follows: . □
3. Approximations on Subspaces
Let
. The semi-open intervals of equal lengths
, nh = 1,
,
together with the open
define for
a partition of (0,1), k=1,n,
. Consider the interval indicator functions that have as support these intervals (k=1,n), nh=1:
The family
F of finite dimensional subspaces
that are the linear spans of interval indicator functions of the h-partitions defined by (3) with disjoint supports,
, built on a multi-level structure, are including
by halving the mesh h. In fact, this property is obtained from (3) observing that any
can be rewritten as
.
Observation 2: Any pair from has disjoint supports. Moreover,
· for any , and if , k=1,n;
· for any , if and, if ;
· supposing that verifies the requests to apply the Fubini theorem, then:
because . due to the disjoint supports for of the indicators. The property attracts the 1-diagonal sparsity of matrix representations for operator approximations on finite dimension subspaces.
Citing [
5], (pg 986), integral operator
with the kernel function:
is a finite rank integral operator orthogonal projection having the spectrum {0, 1} with eigenvalue 1 of multiplicity n (nh=1) corresponding to the orthogonal eigenfunctions
. We will show it, by proving that
,
and, as a consequence, obviously
for
. For any
,
, where ,
that has the form of the standard orthogonal projection from onto , i.e., for any , the linear operator defined as
, where .
We will note the difference between the projection of an element on a subspace, denoting it with: that we will use it in connection with operator restrictions to .
Now, for ,
, with for , and valued to for k=j. Follows:
and therefore, for every involving for any . Now, due to the including properties of the finite dimension subspaces whose union is dense,
for .
Then, from the property i) in Theorem 2 holds for any integral operator on the family of finite dimension subspaces spanned by indicator interval functions associated with partitions defined by (3).
In fact formally, with the notations and ,
, proving that is a collection of operator approximations verifying the property i) in Theorem 2/Lemma 1.
Suppose that is positive on the dense set. Otherwise, we should replace it with its associate Hermitian and, use the Corollary of the Lemma 1.
The integral operator approximation of
on
denoting it by
, is a finite rank operator approximation, with a kernel function ([
5]):
where the pieces
of the kernel function
in the sum have disjoint supports in
, namely
. Thus, follows:
Remark 2. The matrix representation of is a sparse 1-diagonal matrix.
Evaluating for , we obtain
with . Then,
for
(see also Observation 2) and the matrix representation of the finite rank operator
, is:
. It is a sparse diagonal matrix because
for
and, having the diagonal entries
Now, if , ,
where
is the positivity parameter of the finite rank operator approximation
given by
In order to apply Lemma 1 or Lemma 2, we need the positivity of on S. It is obtained from the positivity of its restrictions on the subspaces of the family, as follows. Otherwise, we have to apply the Corollary of Lemma 1.
Observation 3. The restrictions of the integral operator to the subspaces of F, where its kernel is positive valued on (0,1)2 excepting a set of measure Lebesgue zero, are positive definite.
Proof.
We will use Observation 2 applying Fubini theorem in order to obtain matrix representations sparse 1-diagonal. Like in the cases of operator approximations based on the domain partitions, we expect to obtain sparse matrix representations. The number of the diagonal non empty is given by the number of the function elements sharing their support, in our case any pair of indicator interval functions has disjoint supports so, the matrix representations are 1-diagonal:
for . If the kernel is positive valued, then:
for any , i.e., is positive on for any involving the positivity of the integral operator on S. □
Moreover, involving
4. Proof of the Alcantara-Bode Equivalent
Alcantara-Bode ([
2], pg. 151) in his theorem of the equivalent formulation obtained from the Beurling equivalent formulation ([
4]) of RH, states:
where
is a Hilbert-Schmidt integral operator ([
2]) whose kernel
is the fractional part function of the ratio (
). The kernel function
is continue almost everywhere and its discontinuities in
consist in a set of numerable one dimensional lines of the form
, so with Lebesgue measure zero. The entries in the diagonal matrix representation
of the finite rank integral operator
are given by:
, as valued in [
1]:
where
is the Euler-Mascheroni constant (≃ 0.5772156...).
The formulae in (9) were computed using the suggestion found in [
4] for the fractional part: for
,
.
Subsequently, splitting the interval of integration in variable x, in and , we obtain:
The sequence
monotonically decrease for
and converges to 0.5 for k
. When
, we have:
. Then:
showing that the positivity parameters of the sequence of operator approximations
verifies ii) and iii) properties in Lemma 1 (Theorem 2).
Theorem 3. The Alcantara-Bode equivalent holds, involving that RH is true.
Proof.
From Observation 3 we obtain the positivity of the operator on the dense set and with (9), we obtain the bound of the positivity parameters of the operator approximations on the subspaces of the family F. Then, by Lemma 1 follows the strict positivity of the operator on the dense set and subsequently, from Theorem 1, . Then half of Alcantara-Bode equivalent formulation of the Riemann Hypothesis holds involving the other half should hold. Therefore the Riemann Hypothesis is true. □
Theorem 3.a Injectivity Criteria: The Alcantara-Bode equivalent holds.
Proof.
The injectivity criteria introduced in [
1] could be used in our context applied to the restrictions of
.
It is easier to observe (see also [
11]) that the matrix representations of the operator restrictions differ from the representations of the finite rank approximations by the scaling factor
h:
. Thus, we have
for . So, for applying Lemma 2 we need to involve the adjoint operator whose kernel function is
in order to obtain the parameters
that is already done in [
11]. However, here are the steps.
For ,
,
where . Follows:
.
Because is valued in [0,1), for every , obtaining:
and, for every .
With
, the injectivity parameter of
T on
given by
is evaluated as
a constant on every subspace. Then, applying Lemma 2 we obtain
. □
Comments.
· A connection between Zeta function
and the integral operator
can be observed in [
4] by reformulating the left term in the expression as
:
· Considering the indicator of semi-open intervals functions of a partition of the domain, the subspaces are including (
) ensuring the monotony of the positivity parameters. If we replace the indicator open-interval functions for generating the subspace
as well as the indicator closed-interval functions generating the subspace
,
then both sets
and
are still dense like
S losing instead the including subspaces property. Information on the density of the set
could be found in textbooks of functional analysis. On the density of
S, we showed in V4 of [
11] that
if one of the sets S, and is dense, then others are dense. A sketch of proof follows. Let
be dense. If f is orthogonal on any
then:
, k=1,n, , showing that f is orthogonal to any and so f should be 0 because is dense. So, S is dense.
· The dense sets
S and
have been used in [
5] and [
6] to obtain optimal evaluations of the decay rate of convergence to zero of the eigenvalues of Hermitian integral operators having a kernel function such as Mercer kernels ([
9]).
· The associated Hermitian having the kernel verifies automatically the requests of positivity on the dense set and the existence of the finite rank approximations. For proving its strict positivity on S we should compute the positivity parameters on finite dimension subspaces and determine their inferior bound. We could choose the line used in [1] or to approximate its kernel on subspaces like: for , j=2,k-1 and j=k+1, n, for , as
= for and
for where is the floor function. We could continue by integrating in variable t first and then in x and y, to obtain on a level h for a k diagonal entry from , as that is of order. Thus, the positivity parameter on of the Hermitian is
where for j=1, and j=k should also be computed.
The references [13,14,15,16] are related to other RH equivalents, [8] to exotic integrals and [12] to multi-level discretisations on separable Hilbert spaces.
Funding
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. No funding was received.
Acknowledgments
The author has been researcher at Inst. of Math., Romanian Academy (IMAR) & Lecturer al Catholic Univ. Milan, It. Now, retired. No affiliations or sponsors. Addr.: Windsor, Univ. Ave E. On, n9a3a5 Ca.
Email:
dumitru_adam@yahoo.ca (
web page: www.riemann_hypothesis.ca) The solution is a numerical analysis one backed by results obtained in a classical fashion of functional analysis. However, while waiting for a result to RH in the number theory field, this solution is addressed to those in need to have a response whether RH is true and, it is in accordance with the principle of Clay Inst. of Math. expressed as (citing [
7]):
"A proof that it is true for every interesting solution would shed light on many of the mysteries surrounding the distribution of prime numbers."
Conflicts of Interest
No Competing Interests. Nothing to declare.
References
- Adam, D., (2022) "On the Injectivity of an Integral Operator Connected to Riemann Hypothesis", J. Pure Appl Math. 2022; 6(4):19-23, DOI: 10.37532/2752-8081.22.6(4).19-23 (crossref:) (2021). [CrossRef]
- Alcantara-Bode, J., (1993) "An Integral Equation Formulation of the Riemann Hypothesis", Integr Equat Oper Th, Vol. 17 pg. 151-168, 1993.
- Atkinson, K., Bogomolny, A., (1987) "The Discrete Galerkin Method for Integral Equations", Mathematics of Computation", Vol. 48. Nr 178, pg. 595-616 1987.
- Beurling, A., (1955) "A closure problem related to the Riemann zeta function", Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 41 pg. 312-314, 1955.
- Buescu, J., Paixa∼o A. C., (2007) "Eigenvalue distribution of Mercer-like kernels", Math. Nachr. 280, No. 9–10, pg. 984 – 995, 2007.
- Chang, C.H., Ha, C.W. (1999) "On eigenvalues of differentiable positive definite kernels", Integr. Equ. Oper. Theory 33 pg. 1-7, 1999.
- ClayMath, Ins. (2024) "https://www.claymath.org/millennium/riemann-hypothesis/", 2024.
- Furdui, O., "Fractional Part Integrals", in Limits, Series, and Fractional Part Integrals. Problem Books in Mathematics, Springer NY, 2013. [CrossRef]
- Mercer, J., (1909) "Functions of positive and negative type and their connection with the theory of integral equations", Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A 209, 1909.
- Rudin, W., ”Real and Complex Analysis”, McGraw-Hill International,Third Edition 1987.
- Adam, D., (2024) "On the Method for Proving the RH Using the Alcantara-Bode Equivalence". [CrossRef]
- Adam, D. (1994) "Mesh Independence of Galerkin Approach by Preconditioning", Preconditioned Iterative Methods - Johns Hopkins Libraries, Lausanne, Switzerland; [Langhome, Pa.] Gordon and Breach, 1994. Crossref.: Int. Journal of Comp. Math., Vol. 28, 1989 - Issue 1-4, Pg. 227-236. [CrossRef]
- Broughan, K., (2017) "Equivalents of the Riemann Hypothesis Volume One: Arithmetic Equivalents", Cambridge University PressISBN: 978-1-107-19704-6.
- Cislo, J., Wolf, M., "Criteria equivalent to the Riemann Hypothesis", arXiv, 2008. [CrossRef]
- Conrey, J.B., Farmer W.D., (2019) "Equivalences to the Riemann Hypothesis", https://www.scribd.com/document/ 416320708/Equivalences-to-the-Riemann-Hypothesis.
- AIMATH, https://www.aimath.org/WWN/rh/.
|
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).