Let $\zeta(s)$ be the Riemann zeta function, that is, $$\zeta(s) = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}{\frac{1}{n^s}}.$$

A function $g$ is said to be multiplicative if, whenever $\gcd(x,y)=1$, we have $$g(xy) = g(x)g(y).$$ Examples of multiplicative (arithmetic) functions include the divisor-sum $\sigma(z)=\sigma_{1}(z)$ and the abundancy index $I(z)=\sigma(z)/z$.

It is known that, if a function $f$ is multiplicative (and not identically zero), then $f(1)=1$.

Proof: Suppose that $f$ is multiplicative (and not identically zero). Since $\gcd(m,1)=1$ and $f \neq 0$ is multiplicative, then $$f(m)=f(m\cdot{1})=f(m)f(1)$$ which implies that $f(1)=1$.

Since we know that $\zeta(1) \neq 1$ (in fact, the sum $$\zeta(1) = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}{\frac{1}{n}}$$ is known to diverge), then can we already conclude that the Riemann zeta function $\zeta$ is not multiplicative?

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ The term "multiplicative" is for functions defined on the positive integers. Zeta isn't defined at $1.$ $\endgroup$
    – coffeemath
    Jan 8 '19 at 12:02
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @coffeemath, ohh yeah right! Can you write your last comment as an actual answer, so that I would be able to accept it? Thanks! $\endgroup$ Jan 8 '19 at 12:06

The term "multiplicative" is used for a function $f$ defined on the positive integers, for which $f(mn)=f(m)f(n)$ whenever $\gcd(m,n)=1.$ The Riemann zeta function $\zeta$ isn't even defined at $1$ so is not a candidate to be called multiplicative. Even ignoring the problem at $1$ it could be checked numerically that $\zeta(2)\zeta(3) \neq \zeta(6)$.

Added: No need for a numerical check. Exact values for $\zeta(2k)$ are known, and $\zeta(6)/\zeta(2)<0.7.$ So it can't equal $\zeta(3),$ which is greater than $1.$

Another note: $\zeta(n)$is strictly monotone decreasing as $n>1$ increases. So if for $a,b$ with $1 <a,b$ we had $\zeta(ab)=\zeta(a)\zeta(b),$ then since $ab>a$ it would follow that $\zeta(ab)/\zeta(a)<1,$ which cannot be $\zeta(b)>1.$ So $\zeta(n)$ is not multiplicative for any values of $a,b>1,$ coprime or not.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Thank you for your answer. I hope you don't mind my minor edit. $\endgroup$ Jan 8 '19 at 12:18

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.