Advances in Pure Mathematics
Vol.3 No.9(2013), Article ID:41127,5 pages DOI:10.4236/apm.2013.39098
Value Distribution of L-Functions with Rational Moving Targets
1Intelligent Medical Objects, Inc., Northbrook, USA
2Department of Mathematical Sciences, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, USA
Email: mcardwell@e-imo.com, *ye@math.niu.edu
Copyright © 2013 Matthew Cardwell, Zhuan Ye. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. In accordance of the Creative Commons Attribution License all Copyrights © 2013 are reserved for SCIRP and the owner of the intellectual property Matthew Cardwell, Zhuan Ye. All Copyright © 2013 are guarded by law and by SCIRP as a guardian.
Received August 26, 2013; revised September 26, 2013; accepted October 1, 2013
Keywords: Value Distribution; Moving Target; L-Function; Selberg Class
ABSTRACT
We prove some value-distribution results for a class of L-functions with rational moving targets. The class contains Selberg class, as well as the Riemann-zeta function.
1. Introduction
We define the class to be the collection of functions
satisfying Ramanujan hypothesisAnalytic continuation and Functional equation. We also denote the degree of a function
by
which is a non-negative real number. We refer the reader to Chapter six of [1] for a complete definitions. Obviously, the class
contains the Selberg class. Also every function in the class
is an
-function and the Riemann-zeta function is in the class. In this paper, we prove a value-distribution theorem for the class
with rational moving targets. The theorem generalizes the value-distribution results in Chapter seven of [1] from fixed targets to moving targets.
Theorem. Assume that and
is a rational function with
. Let the roots of the equation
be denoted by
. Then
(I) For any,
(II) For sufficiently large negative,
Proof of (I). It is known that if, then
where is the index of the first non-zero term of the sequence of
,
with
. Since
, there exists
such that
for
. It follows that
for all real part of zeros of the function
. We set
where the degrees of
are
, respectively; and define
Thus, there is such that
is analytic in the region
since
is a meromorphic function in
with the only pole at
. We apply Littlewood’s argument principle [3] to
in the rectangle
where
are parameters satisfying
. Thus,
where the given logarithm is defined as in Littlewood’s argument principle [3]. To prove our result, however, we first decompose our auxiliary function by
(1)
Without loss of generality, we may assume that whenever
since we can always write
for
due to our choice of the parameters which define the rectangle
. However, the modification will guarantee in the case of
that
exhibit polynomial growth, which is necessary for our proof. In the case of
,
already exhibits polynomial growth, and no such adjustment is necessary. We now integrate the logarithm of
to get
where the terms are the integrals of the maximum contribution from writing
as a sum of logarithms. By our choice of
, both
and
are analytic in
Hence, Cauchy’s Theorem gives
(2)
To connect this integral with Littlewood’s argument principle [3], we note that the definition of guarantees that
(3)
In light of (2) and because the quantity given in (3) is imaginary-valued, we get for
(4)
for instance.
We now estimate. For
large enough, we have for
(since
),
Then for large enough,
, we find in a similar fashion that
Since we have the same estimate for, we find that
where the final bound follows from Jensen’s inequality. It is known [2] that for,
Hence, uniformly in
.
We next move to estimate. For sufficiently large positive real number
, we have
(5)
so
since. Furthermore,
Since we may take large enough so that
, we may write
using a Taylor series expansion in the rectangle
. For
, we have after taking real parts that
We now observe that for sufficiently large T and some constant M we have
for and
for sufficiently large. In light of these bounds and the definition of
, we have (6)
where the last equality holds because could be sufficiently large. Replacing
by
in the above computations, we see analogously that
.
Finally, we estimate and
. We show the computation for
explicitly and note that the bound for
follows analogously. We first suppose that
has exactly
zeros for
. Then, there are at most
subintervals, counting for multiplicities, in which
is of constant sign. Thus,
(7)
It remains to estimate. To this end, we define
Then
so that if for
, then
.
Now let and
, and choose
large enough so that
. Then
for
, showing that no zeros or poles of
are located in
. Thus, both
and
are analytic in
. Letting
denote the number of zeros of
in
, we have
By Jensen’s formula
and so
(8)
|
By (5), is bounded. Further, it is clear from a property of
functions that we have
for some positive absolute numbers in any vertical strip of bounded width. The same estimate must hold for
as well. Thus, the integral in (8) is
, implying that
. Since the interval
, it follows that
With this bound, we integrate (7) to deduce that
As previously noted, we may bound in the same way. Thus, we attain the desired bounds for
and
. Consequently, the first part of the theorem is proved by using (4).
Proof of (II). As in the proof of the first part of the theorem, we conclude that there exists a real number for which the real parts
of all
-values satisfy
; and also, there exist
for each rational function
such that no zeros of
lie in the quarter-plane
. As before, we define the rectangle
where
are parameters satisfying
.
Proceeding as in the proof of the first part of the theorem, we see that
for where
is defined as in (1). In the equation above, we note that we have chosen to compute
separately. Indeed, this is the only estimate that we will need. For the integrals
,
and
, the bounds given as in the proof of the first part of the theorem still hold. First, integral
is unchanged. On the other hand, the integrals
have changed by our choice of
, but, as we have done as before, we still have the desired bound since the only requirement is that we consider
in a vertical strip of fixed width, which we have in this case.
We now bound. Since
, we have by the functional equation in the definition of
function,
Taking logarithms, we get
(9)
Since, for, we have, uniformly in
,
where are two constants. It follows, for
as
, that
We now consider the last term in (9). Since,
and noting, we have for any
and
for sufficiently large. Then we see the quotient
when is large enough so that
Therefore, we find that
Integrating in light of these estimates, we see
The first integral is, and the second integral is
for sufficiently large and negative
by the method used to derive (6). Hence,
With the estimates for the’s, we have proved the second part of the theorem.
REFERENCES
- J. Steuding, “Value Distribution of L-Functions,” Number 1877 in Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Springer, 2007.
- H. S. A. Potter, “The Mean Values of Certain Dirichlet Series I,” Proceedings London Mathematical Society, Vol. 46, No. 2, 1940, pp. 467-468. http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/plms/s2-46.1.467
- E. C. Titchmarsh, “The Theory of Functions,” 2nd Edition, Oxford, 1939.
NOTES
*Corresponding author.