In this post we’ll make sense of a holomorphic square root and logarithm. Wrote this up because I was surprised how hard it was to find a decent complete explanation.

Let $f \colon U \rightarrow \mathbb C$ be a holomorphic function. A holomorphic $n$-th root of $f$ is a function $g \colon U \rightarrow \mathbb C$ such that $f(z) = g(z)^n$ for all $z \in U$. A logarithm of $f$ is a function $g \colon U \rightarrow \mathbb C$ such that $f(z) = e^{g(z)}$ for all $z \in U$.

The main question …

Epistemic status: highly dubious. I found almost no literature doing anything quite like what follows, which unsettles me because it makes it likely that I’m overcomplicating things significantly.

1. Synopsis

Recently I was working on an elegant problem which was the original problem 6 for the 2015 International Math Olympiad, which reads as follows:

Problem [IMO Shortlist 2015 Problem C6]

Let $S$ be a nonempty set of positive integers. We say that a positive integer $n$ is clean if it has a unique representation as a sum of an odd number of distinct elements from $S$. Prove that there exist infinitely many positive integers that are not clean.

Proceeding by contradiction, one can prove (try it!) that in fact all sufficiently large integers have exactly one representation as a sum of an even subset of $S$. Then, the problem reduces to …

Here I talk about my first project at the Emory REU. Prerequisites for this post: some familiarity with number fields.

1. Motivation: Arithmetic Progressions

Given a property $P$ about primes, there’s two questions we can ask:

1. How many primes $\le x$ are there with this property?
2. What’s the least prime with this property?

As an example, consider an arithmetic progression $a$, $a+d$, …, with $a < d$ and $\gcd(a,d) = 1$. The strong form of Dirichlet’s Theorem tells us that basically, the number of primes $\equiv a \pmod d$ is $\frac 1d$ the total number of primes. Moreover, the celebrated Linnik’s Theorem tells us that the first prime is $O({\mathrm{d\; \dots }}^{}$

In this post I will sketch a proof Dirichlet Theorem’s in the following form:

Theorem 1 (Dirichlet’s Theorem on Arithmetic Progression)

Let $$\psi(x;q,a) = \sum_{\substack{n \le x \\ n \equiv a \mod q}} \Lambda(n).$$ Let $N$ be a positive constant. Then for some constant $C(N) > 0$ depending on $N$, we have for any $q$ such that $q \le (\log x)^N$ we have $$\psi(x;q,a) = \frac{1}{\phi(q)} x + O\left( x\exp\left(-C(N) \sqrt{\log …$$

Prerequisites for this post: previous post, and complex analysis. For this entire post, $s$ is a complex variable with $s = \sigma + it$.

1. The $\Gamma$ function

So there’s this thing called the Gamma function. Denoted $\Gamma(s)$, it is defined by $$\Gamma(s) = \int_0^{\infty} x^{s-1} e^{-x} dx$$ as long as $\sigma > 0$. Here are its values at the first few integers:

$$\begin{aligned} \Gamma(1) &= 1 \\ \Gamma(2) &= 1 \\ \Gamma(3) &= 2 \\ \Gamma(4) &= 6 \\ \Gamma(5) &= 24. \end{aligned}$$