From: Robert Adams on
Are there any "non-trvial" poles of the zeta function? If so, have
they been tabulated?

Looking at the Hadamard product form, it looks like the poles would be
equal to the zeros of gamma(1 + s/2).


Bob
From: Gc on
On 26 maalis, 15:05, Robert Adams <robert.ad...(a)analog.com> wrote:
> Are there any "non-trvial" poles of the zeta function? If so, have
> they been tabulated?
>
> Looking at the Hadamard product form, it looks like the poles would be
> equal to the zeros of gamma(1 + s/2).
>
> Bob

No. The zeta function has only essential singularity in z=1.
From: Aage Andersen on

"Robert Adams"
> Looking at the Hadamard product form, it looks like the poles would be
> equal to the zeros of gamma(1 + s/2).

The gamma function has no zeros in the complex plane.

Aage


From: Gerry on
On Mar 27, 12:10 am, Gc <gcut...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> On 26 maalis, 15:05, Robert Adams <robert.ad...(a)analog.com> wrote:
>
> > Are there any "non-trvial" poles of the zeta function? If so, have
> > they been tabulated?
>
> > Looking at the Hadamard product form, it looks like the poles would be
> > equal to the zeros of gamma(1 + s/2).
>
> > Bob
>
> No. The zeta function has only essential singularity in z=1.

Essential singularity? It's a simple pole, no?
--
GM
From: David C. Ullrich on
On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 06:10:07 -0700 (PDT), Gc <gcut667(a)hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On 26 maalis, 15:05, Robert Adams <robert.ad...(a)analog.com> wrote:
>> Are there any "non-trvial" poles of the zeta function? If so, have
>> they been tabulated?
>>
>> Looking at the Hadamard product form, it looks like the poles would be
>> equal to the zeros of gamma(1 + s/2).
>>
>> Bob
>
>No. The zeta function has only essential singularity in z=1.

No, the zeta function has no essential singularities. Maybe
you meant that it has only one isolated singularity.