Not signed in (Sign In)

# Start a new discussion

## Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

• Sign in using OpenID

## Discussion Tag Cloud

Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

• CommentRowNumber1.
• CommentAuthorUrs
• CommentTimeAug 21st 2014
• (edited Feb 10th 2016)

created a table-for-inclusion and included it into the relevant entries:

zeta-functions and eta-functions and theta-functions and L-functions – table

Presently it looks like this:

zeta function eta function theta function
differential geometry/analysis zeta function of an elliptic differential operator eta function of a self-adjoint operator section of line bundle over complex torus
number theory over a number field Dedekind zeta function Hecke L-function Hecke theta function
number theory over $\mathbb{Q}$ Riemann zeta function Dirichlet L-function Jacobi theta function

The main statement of this analogy is discussed for instance on the first pages of

I have added some paragraphs at eta invariant, accordingly.

• CommentRowNumber2.
• CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
• CommentTimeAug 21st 2014

Doesn’t Richardson effectively say that Dirichlet L-function should be in the bottom row? The Riemann zeta function but twisted by some character. Wouldn’t the missing entry be Hecke L-function?

• CommentRowNumber3.
• CommentAuthorUrs
• CommentTimeAug 21st 2014

Ah, thanks, yes, that sounds right. Have edited accordingly now.

• CommentRowNumber4.
• CommentAuthorUrs
• CommentTimeAug 21st 2014

Another thing:

the Selberg zeta function of a Riemann surface is hopefully identical to the zeta function of an elliptic differential operator for the Laplace operator of the surface. Where would this be discussed?

• CommentRowNumber5.
• CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
• CommentTimeAug 22nd 2014

Probably need to beef up Selberg trace formula:

When Γ is the fundamental group of a Riemann surface, the Selberg trace formula describes the spectrum of differential operators such as the Laplacian in terms of geometric data involving the lengths of geodesics on the Riemann surface. In this case the Selberg trace formula is formally similar to the explicit formulas relating the zeros of the Riemann zeta function to prime numbers, with the zeta zeros corresponding to eigenvalues of the Laplacian, and the primes corresponding to geodesics. Motivated by the analogy, Selberg introduced the Selberg zeta function of a Riemann surface, whose analytic properties are encoded by the Selberg trace formula. (wiki)

Loads, as ever, at Watkin’s site.

• CommentRowNumber6.
• CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
• CommentTimeAug 22nd 2014

Created a stub for Arthur-Selberg trace formula.

• CommentRowNumber7.
• CommentAuthorUrs
• CommentTimeAug 22nd 2014

Thanks! I have uploaded those lecture notes by Bump here and briefly pointed to them from the main text.

• CommentRowNumber8.
• CommentAuthorUrs
• CommentTimeAug 22nd 2014
• (edited Aug 22nd 2014)

One place I see where the Selberg-type trace formula is discussed together with explicit discussion of the zeta-function of an elliptic operator is

The zeta function itself is (2.13) there.

• CommentRowNumber9.
• CommentAuthorUrs
• CommentTimeAug 27th 2014
• (edited Aug 27th 2014)

I have expanded the table by a new row “physics/2dCFT” highlighting the fact that

• CommentRowNumber10.
• CommentAuthorUrs
• CommentTimeAug 28th 2014

edited the bottom-right entries in the table

But this needs attention, I need to read up on this. I suppose it starts out as:

• over $\mathbb{Q}$ for every Artin L-function is equal to some Dirichlet L-function;

• over a general number field, every Artin L-function is equal to some Hecke L-function “of finite order” (is this right?!)

What, if anything, is the analogous statement now for function fields?

• CommentRowNumber11.
• CommentAuthorUrs
• CommentTimeSep 1st 2014
• (edited Sep 1st 2014)

I have split in the table the column which previously contained both eta functions and L-functions in two.

I had originally taken that idea to have a single column for them from Richardson, first page, which asserts that the eta function is to the Dirichlet L-function as the zeta function of an elliptic operator is to the Riemann zeta… but this is not quite accurate it seems to me.

Rather, the point is that L-functions are twisted zeta functions, specifically a zeta function is the Mellin transform of $\theta(0,-)$ while an L-function is a Mellin transform of $\theta(\mathbf{z},-)$ for general $\mathbf{z}$ (e.g. Kudla77, Stopple 95).

The point of eta-functions is somehow different. They appear in twisted and untwisted form just as the zeta functions, but in some way they divide the parameter $s$ by two. This is clear in the operator-analysis row of the table. I am not sure under which name this secretly appears in the number-theory rows. Only that it makes the special values be at a value of $s$ which looks like $\Re(s) = 1/2$ from the point of view of the zeta function. Which of course reminds one of something…

• CommentRowNumber12.
• CommentAuthorDavidRoberts
• CommentTimeSep 2nd 2014

There are also, I vaguely recall, special values that happen at 3/2, for some L-functions (and possibly other odd numerators as well)

• CommentRowNumber13.
• CommentAuthorUrs
• CommentTimeSep 2nd 2014

made first row of the table more accurate by pointing to 1-loop vacuum amplitude and to vacuum energy

• CommentRowNumber14.
• CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
• CommentTimeSep 2nd 2014

For the entry to the left of Goss zeta function, perhaps Goss’s A formal mellin transform in the arithmetic of function fields helps.

Add your comments
• Please log in or leave your comment as a "guest post". If commenting as a "guest", please include your name in the message as a courtesy. Note: only certain categories allow guest posts.
• To produce a hyperlink to an nLab entry, simply put double square brackets around its name, e.g. [[category]]. To use (La)TeX mathematics in your post, make sure Markdown+Itex is selected below and put your mathematics between dollar signs as usual. Only a subset of the usual TeX math commands are accepted: see here for a list.

• (Help)