4 ms·
I'm not an analytic number theorist, but my understanding is that the proof requires some values to be 0.5 + some positive epsilon to be correct, and for the sa
by yifanl 4y ago
I'm not an analytic number theorist, but my understanding is that the proof requires some values to be 0.5 + some positive epsilon to be correct, and for the sake of clarity, these somewhat arbitrary constants are chosen to get to the result.