The Riemann Zeta Function and its Connection to Prime

Numbers
Andrew Miller

Contents
1 Abstract 2

2 Background 2
2
3 The Basel Problem and Proof of ζ(2) = π6 2
3.1 The Basel Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2
3.2 How Euler Proved ζ(2) = π6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

4 Probability and Prime Numbers 4

4.1 Probability of Two Integers Being Relatively Prime . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.2 Generalization to n Integers Being Relatively Prime . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

5 Importance of Prime Numbers 6

6 Conclusion 6

7 Appendix 6

1
Drew Miller The Riemann Zeta Function

1 Abstract
Outline the structure of the paper and key results

2 Background
Provide some background on Euler, the Basel Problem, and primes

π2
3 The Basel Problem and Proof of ζ(2) = 6
3.1 The Basel Problem
The Basel Problem, introduced by Pietro Mengoli in 1644, challenged contemporary mathematicians
with finding a closed form result of the sum of the reciprocals of the squares of all natural numbers.

π2
3.2 How Euler Proved ζ(2) = 6
Proof: This proof will outline the method by which Leonhard Euler proved that the sum of the
2
reciprocals of squares, also known as the Riemann zeta function evaluated at s = 2 is equal to π6 .
∞
X 1 1 1 1 π2
ζ(2) = = + + + · · · =
n=1
n2 12 22 32 6
The method used was to convert the infinite polynomial representing sin(x) into an equivalent
infinite product through algebraic manipulation. Before this product can be created, another set
of polynomials approximating sin(x) must be constructed. The Maclaurin series for sin(x) is as
follows

x3 x5 x7
sin(x) = x − + − + ···
3! 5! 7!
The zeros of the graph of y = sin(x) are used to create a polynomial. A finite polynomial using
the 3 middle zeros of sin(x) is (π + x)x(π − x). But this is just one of infinitely many cubic functions
with these zeros. Multiplying by a constant makes this polynomial a closer approximation to sin(x)
on the interval of −π to π. The new polynomial becomes C(π + x)x(π − x), where C is a constant.
To find the value of C that best approximates sin(x) on the interval we set the C(π + x)x(π − x)
and sin(x) equal to each other at x = 0, differentiate, and solve for C.

sin(x) = C[(π + x)x(π − x)]

Expand RHS
sin(x) = C[xπ 2 − x3 ]
Differentiate both sides with respect to x

cos(x) = C[π 2 − 3x2 ]

Let x = 0
cos(0) = C[π 2 − 3(0)2 ]

2
Drew Miller The Riemann Zeta Function

1 = Cπ 2
1
C= 2
π
Which makes the cubic polynomial approximation for sin(x) on the interval −π to π
1
(π + x)x(π − x)
π2
This can be rewritten as
x2
x(1 −
)
π2
One can then repeat this process using the middle five factors to get the equation
x2 x2
x(1 − 2
)(1 − )
π (2π)2
Doing this again for the middle seven terms gets
x2 x2 x2
x(1 − )(1 − )(1 − )
π2 4π 2 9π 2
The pattern becomes clear, as with each increment, the coefficient of π in each term increases by
1. As a result, sin(x) can be written as an infinite polynomial of the following form.
x2 x2 x2
x(1 − 2
)(1 − 2 )(1 − 2 ) · · ·
π 4π 9π
Or in closed form product notation as
∞ 
x2
Y 
x 1− 2 2
n=1
n π

Because this infinite product and the Maclaurin series of sin(x) are both representations of
sin(x), it follows that expansion of the infinite product will equate to the infinite sum. To expand
the infinite product into the infinite sum, one can begin to multiply terms together one at a time.
x2 x2 x2
x(1 − 2
)(1 − 2 )(1 − 2 ) · · ·
π 4π 9π
Multiply the first two terms
1 3 x2 x2
(x − 2
x )(1 − 2 )(1 − 2 ) · · ·
π 4π 9π
Multiply the first two terms of the new expression
1 1 1 x2
(x + (− 2
− 2 )x3 + 4 x5 )(1 − 2 ) · · ·
π 4π π 9π
At this point we will continue to multiply the factors out, but we will pay particular attention
to the growth of the x3 term because we will later use it to compare with the x3 term of the infinite
sum.
1 1 1
(x + (− 2 − 2 − 2 )x3 + (· · · )x5 + (· · · )x7 ) · · ·
π 4π 9π

3
Drew Miller The Riemann Zeta Function

1 1 1 1
(x + (− − 2− )x3 + (· · · )x5 + (· · · )x7 ) · · ·
π 2 4π 2 9π 16π 2
As a result, the term by itself looks like
1 1 1 1
(− 2
− 2− 2− − · · · )x3
π 4π 9π 16π 2
Observe how the x3 term evolves by subtracting another term where the coefficient of π increases
by 1. Since the infinite sum is equal to the infinite product, we can compare the x3 terms of the
sum and product by setting the coefficients equal to each other. This equation becomes
1 1 1 1 1
−=− 2 − 2 − 2 − − ···
3! π 4π 9π 16π 2
This can be simplified by multiplying both sides by −π 2

π2 1 1 1 1
= 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + ···
3! 1 2 3 4
π2 1 1 1 1
= 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + ···
6 1 2 3 4
Observe that RHS is equal to the sum of the reciprocals of squares, therefore
∞
X 1 π2
=
n=1
n2 6

4 Probability and Prime Numbers

Describe how the connection between the Riemann Zeta Function and probability exists

4.1 Probability of Two Integers Being Relatively Prime

The goal in this proof is to algebraically manipulate the expanded zeta function and then compare
with the representation of the probability that two integers are relatively prime. To do this, we must
first furnish a lemma in which we derive the probability that two random integers are relatively
prime.

Lemma 4.1 The probability that two randomly selected natural numbers are relatively prime is
1 1 1 1
(1 − )(1 − 2 )(1 − 2 )(1 − 2 ) · · ·
22 3 5 7
Proof: We begin by taking the probability that a single integer is divisible by two, which is 21 .
Similarly, the probability that two numbers are both not divisible by 2 is 212 . This means that the
probability that two numbers are both NOT divisible by 2 is (1 − 212 ).

Now we repeat process for divisibility by 3. Note that the probability that 2 numbers are both

4
Drew Miller The Riemann Zeta Function

NOT divisible by 3 is (1 − 312 ).

To find the probability that two numbers are not divisible by 2 OR 3 is given by the product of the
two results we just found
1 1
(1 − 2 )(1 − 2 )
2 3
We can then follow this format, finding the probability that any 2 numbers are not divisible by a
given prime number p. When do this for all prime numbers, we reveal that the probability of 2
numbers sharing no common factors as
1 1 1 1
(1 − 2 )(1 − 2 )(1 − 2 )(1 − 2 ) · · ·
2 3 5 7

Now we can show that this probability discovery has connections to the Riemann Zeta Function

Proof:
1 1 1 1 1
ζ(s) = s
+ s + s + s + s ··· (1)
1 2 3 4 5
1 1 1 1 1 1
ζ(s) = s + s + s + s + s · · · (2)
2s 2 4 6 8 10
subtract equations (1) and (2) to yield
1 1 1 1 1 1
(1 − )ζ(s) = s + s + s + s + s · · · (3)
2s 1 3 5 7 9
Notice that every multiple of 2 in the denominator was eliminated in this process. Now we take a
copy of (3), multiply the copy by 31s and subtract from the original to eliminate all multiples of 3
in the denominator.
1 1 1 1 1 1
(1 − s )ζ(s) = s + s + s + s + s · · ·
2 1 3 5 7 9
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
(1 − s )ζ(s) = s + s + s + s + s · · ·
3s 2 3 9 15 21 27
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
(1 − s )(1 − s )ζ(s) = s + s + s + s + s · · ·
3 2 1 5 7 11 13
If we repeat this same process to infinity, we eventually get
1 1 1 1 1
· · · (1 − s )(1 − s )(1 − s )(1 − s )ζ(s) = s
7 5 3 2 1
Divide through by ζ(s) to get the following identity, where the denominators on the left hand side
are prime numbers raised to the power s.
1 1 1 1 1
= (1 − s )(1 − s )(1 − s )(1 − s ) · · ·
ζ(s) 2 3 5 7
When evaluated at s = 2, we get
6 1 1 1 1
2
= (1 − 2 )(1 − 2 )(1 − 2 )(1 − 2 ) · · ·
π 2 3 5 7
We then compare with the result of lemma 4.1, which shows that the probability of two numbers
being relatively prime is π62


5
Drew Miller The Riemann Zeta Function

4.2 Generalization to n Integers Being Relatively Prime

Use lemma 4.1 and replace the idea of two integers with any n integers to relate the zeta function
and probability

5 Importance of Prime Numbers

Outline prime number applications to cryptography and security, thus emphasizing the importance
and implications of proving the Riemann hypothesis. Little detail regarding the specifics of the
hypothesis will be given because it is incredibly complex and irrelevant to this paper. Also reference
how prime factorization is computationally hard.

6 Conclusion
Close up the investigation providing a brief overview of the materials presented.

7 Appendix
Include any additional materials necessary. TBD as the investigation continues.