Categorifying Riemann’s Functional Equation
Posted by John Baez
David Jaz Myers just sent me some neat comments on this paper of mine:
and he okayed me posting them here. He’s taking the idea of categorifying the Riemann zeta function, explained in my paper, and going further, imagining what it might mean to categorify Riemann’s functional equation
where is the ‘completed’ Riemann zeta function, which has an extra factor taking into account the ‘real prime’:
My paper categorified the Euler product formula that writes the Riemann zeta function as a product over the usual primes:
I had nothing to say about the real prime.
But it’s the functional equation that sets the stage for focusing on zeroes of the Riemann zeta function with … and then the Riemann Hypothesis! So it’s worth thinking about.
David wrote:
Hi John,
Hope you’re doing well!
I was just thinking about your (and James Dolan’s) definition of the zeta functors associated to a finite type scheme (from here), and I had a small thought which I figured you might find interesting.
I was thinking about the functional equation of the completed zeta functions; how might we complete the zeta functors in such a way that they satisfy a similar functional equation? I don’t know, but I do have an idea for what the transformation might mean in this context. I claim that it is given by the reduced suspension. Let me explain.
First, I’ll want to see the formal power as the power
which I can then categorify by finding a group with cardinality and considering . In the case of the Riemann zeta species, is the cardinality of a finite semisimple ring (a product of finite fields, the groupoid of which has cardinality for each ), and we can simply deloop the additive group of this ring. This gives us a Dirichlet functor
which categorifies the Riemann zeta function when is a finite set.
Taking this point of view on the zeta functor, we can ask the question: what is the transformation ? Here’s where we can look at the reduced suspension . The universal property of the reduced suspension says that maps correspond to points of the homotopy type
(or, more classically, maps from the terminal morphism to ). Since homotopy cardinality is multiplicative for fibrations, that type has cardinality
(when is a finite set of cardinality ).
Taking for finite semisimple of cardinality , we see that has cardinality . Therefore, I think the transformation in the functional equation may be categorified by . If this makes sense, it suggests that completing the zeta functors is a form of stabilization.
Cheers,
David
And then:
As for another eyebrow wiggle about the cardinality of when is a finite set: we have that , the free group on generators. This is of course infinite, but it it is the group completion of the free monoid on generators. Since
it has cardinality .
Maybe it’s better to use the “free delooping” (aka weighted colimit of by ) instead of the reduced suspension. This doesn’t change the above argument because we’re mapping into a groupoid, but now it is true that the Euler characteristic / cardinality of that category is .
