Trying to understand a certain form of zeta function
A month ago I have asked a question about a certain form of the zeta function. I will now try to be more accurate.
facts:
Let $N_s$ be the number of points on the projective hypersurface $bar{H}_f(F_s)$.
Under the condition $N_s = sum_j beta_j - sum_i alpha_i$ for $beta_j, alpha_i in mathbb{C}$ we can say that the zeta function is rational with $$ Z(u) = frac{prod_i 1-alpha_iu}{prod_j 1-beta_ju}. $$
First Question:
Now I have $$ N_s = sum_{k=0}^{n-1} q^{ks} -(-1)^n sum_{chi_0,...,chi_n} [ frac{(-1)^{n+1}}{q} chi_0(a_o^{-1}) cdots chi_n(a_n^{-1})g(chi_0) cdots g(chi_n)]^s .$$ the $chi_i$ are characters of $F$ with the following condition: $chi_i^m = varepsilon, chi_i neq varepsilon$ and $chi_0chi_1 cdots chi_n = varepsilon$. And here comes my question: why does the zeta function has the following form?
$$ Z(u) = frac{P(u)^{(-1)^n}}{(1-u)(1-qu) cdots (1-q^{n-1}u)}, $$ where $ P(u) = prod_{chi_0,...,chi_n} (1-(-1)^{n+1}frac{1}{q}chi_0(a_o^{-1}) cdots chi_n(a_n^{-1})g(chi_0) cdots g(chi_n)u) $.
Thoughts
It is clear to me that
$sum_j beta_j^s = sum_{k=0}^{n-1} q^{ks} $ and $sum_i alpha_i^s =sum_{chi_0,...,chi_n} [ frac{(-1)^{n+1}}{q} chi_0(a_o^{-1}) cdots chi_n(a_n^{-1})g(chi_0) cdots g(chi_n)]^s $ but the term $(-1)^n$ disturbs me. Without this term I would have $Z(u) = frac{P(u)}{(1-u)(1-qu) cdots (1-q^{n-1}u)} $. That's totally fine. Just using the fact above. But like I said I don't get it why I get $(-1)^n$ in the exponent of $P(u)$ if I have the term $(-1)^n$.
Second question:
Do you see why $deg (P(u)) = m^{-1}[(m-1)^{n+1}+(-1)^{n+1}(m-1)]$ ? Sorry that I am clueless, here.
number-theory riemann-zeta characters
asked 2 days ago
RukiaKuchikiRukiaKuchiki
322211
add a comment |
A month ago I have asked a question about a certain form of the zeta function. I will now try to be more accurate.
facts:
Let $N_s$ be the number of points on the projective hypersurface $bar{H}_f(F_s)$.
Under the condition $N_s = sum_j beta_j - sum_i alpha_i$ for $beta_j, alpha_i in mathbb{C}$ we can say that the zeta function is rational with $$ Z(u) = frac{prod_i 1-alpha_iu}{prod_j 1-beta_ju}. $$
First Question:
Now I have $$ N_s = sum_{k=0}^{n-1} q^{ks} -(-1)^n sum_{chi_0,...,chi_n} [ frac{(-1)^{n+1}}{q} chi_0(a_o^{-1}) cdots chi_n(a_n^{-1})g(chi_0) cdots g(chi_n)]^s .$$ the $chi_i$ are characters of $F$ with the following condition: $chi_i^m = varepsilon, chi_i neq varepsilon$ and $chi_0chi_1 cdots chi_n = varepsilon$. And here comes my question: why does the zeta function has the following form?
$$ Z(u) = frac{P(u)^{(-1)^n}}{(1-u)(1-qu) cdots (1-q^{n-1}u)}, $$ where $ P(u) = prod_{chi_0,...,chi_n} (1-(-1)^{n+1}frac{1}{q}chi_0(a_o^{-1}) cdots chi_n(a_n^{-1})g(chi_0) cdots g(chi_n)u) $.
Thoughts
It is clear to me that
$sum_j beta_j^s = sum_{k=0}^{n-1} q^{ks} $ and $sum_i alpha_i^s =sum_{chi_0,...,chi_n} [ frac{(-1)^{n+1}}{q} chi_0(a_o^{-1}) cdots chi_n(a_n^{-1})g(chi_0) cdots g(chi_n)]^s $ but the term $(-1)^n$ disturbs me. Without this term I would have $Z(u) = frac{P(u)}{(1-u)(1-qu) cdots (1-q^{n-1}u)} $. That's totally fine. Just using the fact above. But like I said I don't get it why I get $(-1)^n$ in the exponent of $P(u)$ if I have the term $(-1)^n$.
Second question:
Do you see why $deg (P(u)) = m^{-1}[(m-1)^{n+1}+(-1)^{n+1}(m-1)]$ ? Sorry that I am clueless, here.
number-theory riemann-zeta characters
asked 2 days ago
RukiaKuchikiRukiaKuchiki
322211
add a comment |
A month ago I have asked a question about a certain form of the zeta function. I will now try to be more accurate.
facts:
Let $N_s$ be the number of points on the projective hypersurface $bar{H}_f(F_s)$.
Under the condition $N_s = sum_j beta_j - sum_i alpha_i$ for $beta_j, alpha_i in mathbb{C}$ we can say that the zeta function is rational with $$ Z(u) = frac{prod_i 1-alpha_iu}{prod_j 1-beta_ju}. $$
First Question:
Now I have $$ N_s = sum_{k=0}^{n-1} q^{ks} -(-1)^n sum_{chi_0,...,chi_n} [ frac{(-1)^{n+1}}{q} chi_0(a_o^{-1}) cdots chi_n(a_n^{-1})g(chi_0) cdots g(chi_n)]^s .$$ the $chi_i$ are characters of $F$ with the following condition: $chi_i^m = varepsilon, chi_i neq varepsilon$ and $chi_0chi_1 cdots chi_n = varepsilon$. And here comes my question: why does the zeta function has the following form?
$$ Z(u) = frac{P(u)^{(-1)^n}}{(1-u)(1-qu) cdots (1-q^{n-1}u)}, $$ where $ P(u) = prod_{chi_0,...,chi_n} (1-(-1)^{n+1}frac{1}{q}chi_0(a_o^{-1}) cdots chi_n(a_n^{-1})g(chi_0) cdots g(chi_n)u) $.
Thoughts
It is clear to me that
$sum_j beta_j^s = sum_{k=0}^{n-1} q^{ks} $ and $sum_i alpha_i^s =sum_{chi_0,...,chi_n} [ frac{(-1)^{n+1}}{q} chi_0(a_o^{-1}) cdots chi_n(a_n^{-1})g(chi_0) cdots g(chi_n)]^s $ but the term $(-1)^n$ disturbs me. Without this term I would have $Z(u) = frac{P(u)}{(1-u)(1-qu) cdots (1-q^{n-1}u)} $. That's totally fine. Just using the fact above. But like I said I don't get it why I get $(-1)^n$ in the exponent of $P(u)$ if I have the term $(-1)^n$.
Second question:
Do you see why $deg (P(u)) = m^{-1}[(m-1)^{n+1}+(-1)^{n+1}(m-1)]$ ? Sorry that I am clueless, here.
number-theory riemann-zeta characters
asked 2 days ago
RukiaKuchikiRukiaKuchiki
322211
A month ago I have asked a question about a certain form of the zeta function. I will now try to be more accurate.
facts:
Let $N_s$ be the number of points on the projective hypersurface $bar{H}_f(F_s)$.
Under the condition $N_s = sum_j beta_j - sum_i alpha_i$ for $beta_j, alpha_i in mathbb{C}$ we can say that the zeta function is rational with $$ Z(u) = frac{prod_i 1-alpha_iu}{prod_j 1-beta_ju}. $$
First Question:
Now I have $$ N_s = sum_{k=0}^{n-1} q^{ks} -(-1)^n sum_{chi_0,...,chi_n} [ frac{(-1)^{n+1}}{q} chi_0(a_o^{-1}) cdots chi_n(a_n^{-1})g(chi_0) cdots g(chi_n)]^s .$$ the $chi_i$ are characters of $F$ with the following condition: $chi_i^m = varepsilon, chi_i neq varepsilon$ and $chi_0chi_1 cdots chi_n = varepsilon$. And here comes my question: why does the zeta function has the following form?
$$ Z(u) = frac{P(u)^{(-1)^n}}{(1-u)(1-qu) cdots (1-q^{n-1}u)}, $$ where $ P(u) = prod_{chi_0,...,chi_n} (1-(-1)^{n+1}frac{1}{q}chi_0(a_o^{-1}) cdots chi_n(a_n^{-1})g(chi_0) cdots g(chi_n)u) $.
Thoughts
It is clear to me that
$sum_j beta_j^s = sum_{k=0}^{n-1} q^{ks} $ and $sum_i alpha_i^s =sum_{chi_0,...,chi_n} [ frac{(-1)^{n+1}}{q} chi_0(a_o^{-1}) cdots chi_n(a_n^{-1})g(chi_0) cdots g(chi_n)]^s $ but the term $(-1)^n$ disturbs me. Without this term I would have $Z(u) = frac{P(u)}{(1-u)(1-qu) cdots (1-q^{n-1}u)} $. That's totally fine. Just using the fact above. But like I said I don't get it why I get $(-1)^n$ in the exponent of $P(u)$ if I have the term $(-1)^n$.
Second question:
Do you see why $deg (P(u)) = m^{-1}[(m-1)^{n+1}+(-1)^{n+1}(m-1)]$ ? Sorry that I am clueless, here.
number-theory riemann-zeta characters
number-theory riemann-zeta characters
asked 2 days ago
RukiaKuchikiRukiaKuchiki
322211
asked 2 days ago
RukiaKuchikiRukiaKuchiki
322211
edited 2 days ago
RukiaKuchiki
asked 2 days ago
RukiaKuchikiRukiaKuchiki
322211
asked 2 days ago
RukiaKuchikiRukiaKuchiki
322211
asked 2 days ago
RukiaKuchikiRukiaKuchiki
322211
322211
add a comment |
add a comment |
0
active
oldest
votes
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3062784%2ftrying-to-understand-a-certain-form-of-zeta-function%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3062784%2ftrying-to-understand-a-certain-form-of-zeta-function%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
