Authors: Ayal Sharon
The Dirichlet series of the Zeta function was long ago proven to be divergent throughout half-plane Re(s) =< 1. If also Riemann's proposition is true, that there exists an "expression" of the Zeta function that is convergent at all values of s (except at s = 1), then the Zeta function is both divergent and convergent throughout half-plane Re(s) =< 1 (except at s = 1). This result violates all three of Aristotle's "Laws of Thought": the Law of Identity (LOI), the Law of the Excluded Middle (LEM), and the Law of Non-Contradition (LNC). In classical and intuitionistic logics, the violation of LNC also triggers the "Principle of Explosion": Ex Contradictione Quodlibet (ECQ). In addition, the Hankel contour used in Riemann's analytic continuation of the Zeta function violates Cauchy's integral theorem, providing another proof of the invalidity of analytic continuation of the Zeta function. Also, Riemann's Zeta function is one of the L-functions, which are all invalid, because they are generalizations of the invalid analytic continuation of the Zeta function. This result renders unsound all theorems (e.g. Modularity, Fermat's last) and conjectures (e.g. BSD, Tate, Hodge, Yang-Mills) that assume that an L-function (e.g. Riemann's Zeta function) is valid. We also show that the Riemann Hypothesis (RH) is not "non-trivially true" in classical logic, intuitionistic logic, or three-valued logics (3VLs) that assign a third truth-value to paradoxes (Bochvar's 3VL, Priest's LP).
[v1] 2019-07-25 00:46:10
Unique-IP document downloads: 17 times
Vixra.org is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. Vixra.org will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.
Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.