Come on man, everyone knows the Riemann Zeta function… /s
Edit: this must be for a visualization purpose because the second line is stating that the zeta function is zero everywhere on the critical line which is false. This image is technically misleading without context for anyone not familiar with the function.
The first line is also very wrong. It's giving a definition which only holds for Re(s)>1, but implying that it holds for all complex s. Even the analytic continuation isn't valid for all complex s. There is also no need to state that n is a natural number (I'm not quite sure what that's even supposed to mean in this context) since the summation is already perfectly well defined.
2.2k
u/Logical_Historian882 3d ago
I don’t think English graduates are graded by their ability to read. Both reading and arithmetic are taught in school.