PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 14, 20260 citationsOpen Access

Quantitative Spectral Bounds for the Riemann Zero Log-Gas Laplacian, an Unconditional Prime Sum Identity, and a Program Summary

View Full Paper
DWDevin Wright

Key Points

  • The research aims to establish unconditional spectral bounds and identities related to the Riemann zeros and their implications.
  • Proved unconditional identity relating the trace of the graph Laplacian to a prime sum over Riemann zero positions.
  • Derived lower and upper bounds for the spectral gap using known theorems and new comparisons.
  • Compared spectral bounds with actual zero spacings utilizing existing mathematical insights.
  • Established an unconditional identity for the trace of the graph Laplacian and prime sums without the Riemann Hypothesis.
  • Derived a new upper bound for the spectral gap that is numerically tight for small N values.
  • Summarized the implications of the established results on the broader mathematical conjectures surrounding the Riemann Hypothesis.

Abstract

We present two new unconditional results for the weighted graph Laplacian LN of the first N Riemann zeros, introduced in Wright (2026a–e), and use them to close the research program with a precise account of what has been established and what remains open. First (Theorem 2.2), we prove the unconditional identity TrHad(N) = Pfull(N) + 2N¯ BN , where Pfull is a prime sum over the full complex zero positions ρj , without assuming the Riemann Hypothesis (RH). Second (Corollary 3.6), we prove matching bounds on the spectral gap: the lower bound λ2(LN ) ≥ π2/(N2 δ2 j ) follows from Selberg’s zero-gap theorem and a path-graph comparison, and the upper bound λ2(LN ) ≤ 12 j<k (j−k)2/(γj−γk )2/N(N2 −1) is new and follows from the linear test vector vj= j−(N+1)/2. Both bounds are exact in terms of actual zero spacings; using Ingham’s unconditional max-gap bound and the Selberg gap respectively, they give explicit forms C1(log TN )2/N41/12 ≤λ2(LN ) ≤C2(log TN )2/N unconditionally. The upper bound is numerically tight to within a factor of 1.7–2.0 for N ≤50. We close with a complete program summary: the structural reason the framework cannot by itself prove RH, the connection to the Baluyot–Goldston–Suriajaya–Turnage-Butterbaugh unconditional pair correlation program, and a precise statement of what new external mathematics would be required to close the gap.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Devin Wright (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69ddda4de195c95cdefd7b79https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19521038
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper