1: \documentclass[10pt]{amsart}

2: 

3: \usepackage{amsmath,amsfonts,amscd,amssymb,epsf}

4: \newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]

5: \newtheorem{proposition}[theorem]{Proposition}

6: \newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}

7: \newtheorem{corollary}[theorem]{Corollary}

8: \theoremstyle{definition}

9: \newtheorem{definition}[theorem]{Definition}

10: \newtheorem{example}[theorem]{Example}

11: \theoremstyle{remark} \newtheorem{remark}[theorem]{Remark}

12: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

13: \numberwithin{equation}{section}

14: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

15: \newcommand{\field}[1]{\ensuremath{\mathbb{#1}}}

16: \newcommand{\CC}{\field{C}}

17: \newcommand{\DD}{\field{D}}

18: \newcommand{\HH}{\field{H}}

19: 

20: \newcommand{\RR}{\field{R}}

21: \newcommand{\TT}{\field{T}}

22: \newcommand{\ZZ}{\field{Z}}

23: 

24: \newcommand{\complex}[1]{\mathsf{#1}} %for differential complexes

25: \newcommand{\EEE}{\complex{E}}

26: \newcommand{\SSS}{\complex{S}}

27: \newcommand{\BBB}{\complex{B}}

28: \newcommand{\KKK}{\complex{K}}

29: \newcommand{\AAA}{\complex{A}}

30: \newcommand{\CCC}{\complex{C}}

31: \newcommand{\OOO}{\complex{O}}

32: \newcommand{\TTT}{\complex{T}}

33: \newcommand{\diff}[1]{\mathcal{#1}} %for differential

34:                     %operators

35: %

36: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

37: %

38: % operator names

39: \renewcommand{\d}{\operatorname{d}}

40: \DeclareMathOperator{\id}{id} \DeclareMathOperator{\I}{I}

41: \DeclareMathOperator{\Tot}{Tot} \DeclareMathOperator{\Hom}{Hom}

42: \DeclareMathOperator{\Tor}{Tor} \DeclareMathOperator{\Area}{Area}

43: \DeclareMathOperator{\Ker}{Ker} \DeclareMathOperator{\Diff}{Diff}

44: \DeclareMathOperator{\Mob}{M\ddot{o}b} \DeclareMathOperator{\im}{Im}

45: \DeclareMathOperator{\SL}{SL} \DeclareMathOperator{\PSL}{PSL}

46: \DeclareMathOperator{\PSU}{PSU} \DeclareMathOperator{\re}{Re}

47:  \DeclareMathOperator{\fixed}{fixed} \DeclareMathOperator{\Res}{Res}

48: \DeclareMathOperator{\PP}{PP}

49: % differentials

50: \newcommand{\del}{\partial}

51: \newcommand{\delb}{\bar\partial}

52: \newcommand{\delp}{\partial^\prime}

53: \newcommand{\delpp}{\partial^{\prime\prime}}

54: \newcommand{\deltap}{\d}

55: \newcommand{\deltapp}{\delta}

56: 

57: \newcommand{\eqdef}{\overset{\text{def}}{=}}

58: \newcommand{\ihalf}{\frac{i}{2}}

59: \newcommand{\lo}{{\mathbb{L}}}

60: \newcommand{\Z}{{\mathbb{Z}}}

61: \newcommand{\U}{\mathbb{U}}

62: \newcommand{\mL}{\mathcal{L}}

63: \newcommand{\M}{\mathcal{M}}

64: \newcommand{\B}{\mathcal{B}}

65: \newcommand{\F}{\mathcal{F}}

66: \newcommand{\mP}{\mathcal{P}}

67: \newcommand{\C}{\mathbb{C}}

68: \newcommand{\Del}{\mathbb{D}}

69: \newcommand{\blambda}{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}

70: \newcommand{\R}{\mathbb{R}}

71: \newcommand{\bk}{\backslash}

72: \newcommand{\pa}{\partial}

73: \newcommand{\g}{\gamma}

74: \newcommand{\la}{\langle}

75: \newcommand{\ra}{\rangle}

76: \newcommand{\bu}{\bullet}

77: \newcommand{\ov}{\overline}

78: \newcommand{\ep}{\epsilon}

79: \newcommand{\vep}{\varepsilon}

80: \newcommand{\z}{\bar{z}}

81: \newcommand{\ma}[4]{(\begin{smallmatrix}

82:               #1 & #2 \\ #3 & #4

83:              \end{smallmatrix})}

84: \DeclareMathOperator{\ad}{ad}\DeclareMathOperator{\sgn}{sgn}

85: 

86: \begin{document}

87: 

88: \title{On the minima and convexity of   Epstein Zeta function}

89: \author{S.C. Lim$^1$}\email{$^1$sclim@mmu.edu.my}\author{L.P.

90: Teo$^{2}$}\email{$^2$lpteo@mmu.edu.my}

91: 

92: \keywords{Epstein Zeta function, convexity, minima}

93: \subjclass[2000]{Primary 11E45, 26B15 } \maketitle

94: 

95: \noindent {\scriptsize \hspace{1cm}$^1$Faculty of Engineering,

96: Multimedia University, Jalan Multimedia, }

97: 

98: \noindent {\scriptsize \hspace{1.1cm} Cyberjaya, 63100, Selangor

99: Darul Ehsan, Malaysia.}

100: 

101: \noindent {\scriptsize \hspace{1cm} $^2$Faculty of Information

102: Technology, Multimedia University, Jalan Multimedia,}

103: 

104: \noindent{\scriptsize \hspace{1.1cm} Cyberjaya, 63100, Selangor

105: Darul Ehsan, Malaysia.}

106: \begin{abstract}

107: Let $Z_n(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ be the Epstein zeta function defined

108: as the meromorphic continuation of the function

109: \begin{align*}

110:  \sum_{k\in\Z^n\setminus\{0\}}\left(\sum_{i=1}^n [a_i

111: k_i]^2\right)^{-s},\hspace{1cm}\text{Re}\; s>\frac{n}{2}

112: \end{align*}to the complex plane. We show that for

113: fixed $s\neq n/2$, the function $Z_n(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)$, as a

114: function of $(a_1,\ldots, a_n)\in (\R^+)^n$ with fixed

115: $\prod_{i=1}^n a_i$, has a unique minimum at the point

116: $a_1=\ldots=a_n$. When $\sum_{i=1}^n c_i$ is fixed, the function

117: $$(c_1,\ldots, c_n)\mapsto Z_n\left(s; e^{c_1},\ldots,

118: e^{c_n}\right)$$ can be shown to be a convex function of any $(n-1)$

119: of the variables $\{c_1,\ldots,c_n\}$. These results are then

120: applied to the study of the sign of  $Z_n(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ when

121: $s$ is in the critical range $(0, n/2)$. It is shown that when

122: $1\leq n\leq 9$, $Z_n(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ as a function of

123: $(a_1,\ldots, a_n)\in (\R^+)^n$,

124:  can be both positive and negative for

125: every $s\in (0,n/2)$. When $n\geq 10$, there are some open subsets

126: $I_{n,+}$ of $s\in(0,n/2)$, where $Z_{n}(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ is

127: positive for all $(a_1,\ldots, a_n)\in(\R^+)^n$. By regarding

128: $Z_n(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ as a function of $s$, we find that when

129: $n\geq 10$, the generalized Riemann hypothesis is   false for all

130: $(a_1,\ldots,a_n)$.

131: \end{abstract}

132: 

133: \section{Introduction} In \cite{Ep1, Ep2}, Epstein introduced the

134: following two-dimensional zeta function

135: \begin{align*}

136: Z_2(A;s)=\sum_{(j,k)\in

137: \Z^2\setminus\{(0,0)\}}\left[A(j,k)\right]^{-s},\hspace{1cm}\text{Re}\;

138: s> 1,

139: \end{align*}where $$A(j,k)=aj^2+2bjk+ck^2=\begin{pmatrix} j & k\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix} a & b\\b &c \end{pmatrix}

140: \begin{pmatrix} j\\k\end{pmatrix}$$ is a positive definite real quadratic form associated to the

141: positive definite symmetric matrix

142: $$A=\begin{pmatrix} a & b\\b &c \end{pmatrix}.$$Later on,  some generalizations  of

143: this zeta function to higher dimension were considered \cite{e4, e1,

144: e5, e2, e6}. One of the generalizations is given by

145: \begin{align}\label{eq109_3}

146: Z_n(A;s)=\sum_{k\in

147: \Z^n\setminus\{0\}}\left[k^tAk\right]^{-s},\hspace{1cm}\text{Re}\;

148: s> \frac{n}{2},

149: \end{align}where now $A$ is an $n\times n$ positive definite

150: symmetric matrix and

151: $$k^tAk=\sum_{i=1}^n\sum_{j=1}^nA_{ij}k_i k_j$$ is

152: the associated quadratic form. It was proved that the Epstein zeta

153: function $Z_{n}(A,s)$ has a meromorphic continuation to the whole

154: complex plane with a single pole at $s=n/2$, and it satisfies a

155: functional equation. When $n=1$ and $A=(1)$, $Z_{1}(A;s)$ is nothing

156: but equal to $2\zeta_R(2s)$, where $\zeta_R(s)$ is  the Riemann zeta

157: function. The generalized Riemann hypothesis associated to the

158: Epstein zeta function says that aside from the trivial zeros at

159: $s=-j, j\in \mathbb{N}$, all the other zeros of $Z_{n}(A;s)$ are

160: located at the critical line $\text{Re}\;s=\frac{n}{4}$. As far back

161: as 1947, it has been known \cite{e3} that the Riemann hypothesis is

162: in general not true for the Epstein zeta function, even for $n=2$.

163: 

164: There exists another interpretation of Epstein zeta function with

165: more geometric flavour. Let $v_1, \ldots, v_n$ be $n$ linearly

166: independent vectors in $\R^n$ and let $L$ be the  non-degenerate

167: lattice generated by $\{v_1, \ldots, v_n\}$, i.e. $$L=\left\{

168: \sum_{i=1}^n k_i v_i\,:\, (k_1,\ldots, k_n)\in \Z^n\right\}.$$ The

169: quotient of $\R^n$ by $L$, i.e. $\R^n/L$, is an $n$-dimensional

170: torus. The function

171: \begin{align*}

172: \zeta_n(L;s)=\sum_{v\in L\setminus\{\mathbf{0}\}}\langle v,

173: v\rangle^{-s},\hspace{1cm}\text{where}\;\;\langle v,w\rangle :=

174: \sum_{i=1}^nv_iw_i,

175: \end{align*}is called the zeta function associated to the lattice

176: $L$.  It is actually the same as the Epstein zeta function

177: $Z_n(A;s)$ if  $A=T_L^t T_L$, and $T_L$ being the $n\times n$ matrix

178: whose columns are the generators $v_1, \ldots, v_n$ of the lattice

179: $L$, i.e.,

180: $$T_L=\begin{pmatrix} v_1 & \ldots & v_n\end{pmatrix}.$$Given a lattice $L$, its dual lattice $L^*$ is defined as the set

181: \begin{align*}

182: L^*=\left\{ w\in\R^n\,:\, \langle w, v\rangle =\sum_{i=1}^n w_i v_i

183: \in \Z \;\text{for all}\; v\in L\right\}.

184: \end{align*}$L^*$ is a lattice generated by a dual set of

185: vectors $\{w_1,\ldots, w_n\}$ with $\langle w_i, v_j\rangle

186: =\delta_{ij}$. The corresponding matrix $T_{L^*}$ is related to

187: $T_L$ by $T_{L^*}=(T_L^{-1})^t$. The zeta function $\zeta_n(L^*;s)$

188: of the dual lattice $L^*$ is related to a  spectral zeta function

189: associated to the compact torus $\R^n/L$. Given a compact manifold

190: $M$ with Laplace operator $\Delta_M$, the zeta function of

191: $\Delta_M$ is defined as

192: \begin{align}\label{eq109_2}\zeta_{\Delta_M}(s)=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \lambda_n^{-s},\end{align} where

193: $0< \lambda_1\leq \lambda_2\leq \ldots$ are the nonzero eigenvalues

194: of $\Delta_M$. For the compact torus $\R^n/L$,

195:  the Laplace operator

196: $\Delta=\frac{\pa^2}{\pa x_1^2}+\ldots+\frac{\pa^2}{\pa x_n^2}$ on

197: $\R^n$ descends to the Laplace operator on $\R^n/L$. One can easily

198: check that the associated zeta function $\zeta_{\Delta_{\R^n/L}}$ is

199: up to a constant, the zeta function of the dual lattice $L^*$, i.e.

200: \begin{align*}

201: \zeta_{\Delta_{\R^n/L}}=c\zeta_{n}(L^*;

202: s)=cZ_n\left(T_L^{-1}(T_{L}^{-1})^t;s\right).

203: \end{align*}Under this perspective, the Epstein zeta function enters the realm of

204: theoretical physics. In quantum theory, very often one needs to

205: compute the functional determinant of a positive definite

206: (pseudo)-differential operator $P$ (e.g., the Laplace operator),

207: which is defined as

208: \begin{align}\label{eq109_1}

209: \mathfrak{D}_P=\prod_{i=1}^{\infty}\lambda_i,

210: \end{align}where $\lambda_i, 1\leq i<\infty$ are the nonzero eigenvalues of

211: $P$. This functional determinant usually appears as one-loop

212: partition function of a field theory, and is closely related to

213: Casimir effect

214:   as well as the one-loop effective potential of the theory.

215: In general, the infinite product in \eqref{eq109_1} is divergent and

216: regularization is required to obtain a finite quantity. One of the

217: regularization techniques, known as zeta regularization method (see

218: e.g. \cite{E1, ET,K}), uses the zeta function associated to $P$,

219: $\zeta_P(s)$, which is defined as in \eqref{eq109_2}. By proving

220: that $\zeta_P(s)$ has an analytic continuation to a neighborhood of

221: $s=0$,  the regularized functional determinant $\mathfrak{D}_P$ is

222: then defined as

223: \begin{align*}

224: \mathfrak{D}_P=\exp\left(-\zeta_P'(0)\right).

225: \end{align*}When the underlying spacetime of the field theory is a

226: toroidal manifold $T^n\times \R^N$, where $T^n$ is an

227: $n$-dimensional torus with compactification lengths $L_1, \ldots,

228: L_n$ and $P$ is the Laplace operator, the associated zeta function

229: $\zeta_P(s)$ is, up to a constant, equal to

230: \begin{align*}

231: \sum_{k\in\Z^n\setminus\{0\}}\left(\sum_{i=1}^n

232: \left[\frac{k_i}{L_i}\right]^2\right)^{-s+\frac{N}{2}},

233: \end{align*}which is the Epstein zeta function $Z_n\left(A;

234: s-\frac{N}{2}\right)$, with $A=\text{diag}\,\{ 1/L_1^2, \ldots,

235: 1/L_n^2\}$ a diagonal matrix. We use the notation

236: \begin{align}\label{eq109_5} Z_{n}(s; a_1, \ldots,

237: a_n):=\sum_{k\in\Z^n\setminus\{0\}}\left(\sum_{i=1}^n

238: [a_ik_i]^2\right)^{-s}

239: \end{align} to denote this special subclass of the Epstein

240: zeta function corresponding to $$A=\begin{pmatrix} a_1^2 & 0 &

241: \ldots & 0\\0 & a_2^2 & \ldots &0\\

242: \vdots &\vdots & & \vdots\\

243: 0 & 0 &\ldots & a_n^2\end{pmatrix}$$ in \eqref{eq109_3}. Here it is

244: assumed that $a_1, \ldots, a_n$ are positive real numbers. Another

245: situation where $Z_n(s;a_1,\ldots, a_n)$  appears is when the

246: underlying spacetime is a rectangular cavity    $\Omega:=[0,

247: L_1]\times\ldots\times[0, L_n]\times \R^{N}$. The function $Z_n(s;

248: a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ satisfies a functional equation (or called

249: reflection formula), which can be written in the following symmetric

250: form

251: \begin{align}\label{eq109_8}

252: \sqrt{\prod_{i=1}^n a_i}\pi^{-s}\Gamma(s)Z_{n}\left(s; a_1,\ldots,

253: a_n\right)=\frac{\pi^{s-\frac{n}{2}}}{\sqrt{\prod_{i=1}^n

254: a_i}}\Gamma\left(\frac{n}{2}-s\right)Z_n\left(\frac{n}{2}-s;

255: \frac{1}{a_1},\ldots,\frac{1}{a_n}\right).

256: \end{align}

257: In physics literature, the Epstein zeta function $Z_{n}(s; A)$

258: usually appears together with gamma function in the combination

259: \begin{align}\label{eq109_9} \Gamma(s)Z_{n}(s; A).

260: \end{align} For example, in \cite{AW}, it is found that the Casimir energy of a massless

261: scalar field in the rectangular cavity $\Omega=[0,

262: L_1]\times\ldots\times[0, L_n]\times \R^{N}$ under periodic boundary

263: conditions is, up to a positive constant, equal to

264: \begin{align}\label{eq109_7}

265: -\Gamma\left(-\frac{N}{2}\right)Z_{n}\left(-\frac{N}{2};

266: \frac{1}{L_1},\ldots, \frac{1}{L_n}\right).

267: \end{align}

268: For massless scalar fields under Dirichlet or Neumann boundary

269: conditions, or electromagnetic fields in cavities with perfectly

270: conducting walls or walls with infinite permeability, the

271: corresponding Casimir energy is   expressible as  linear

272: combinations of expressions of the form \eqref{eq109_7}. Another

273: example is the the massless scalar field theory with

274: $\lambda\varphi^4$ interaction on the toroidal manifold $T^n\times

275: \R^{4-n}$, where $n=1,3,4$. It was found that \cite{c41, c42, c43,

276: c44, EK1} the topologically generated mass of this theory, to the

277: one-loop order, is, up to a positive constant, given by :

278: \begin{align*}

279: \Gamma\left(\frac{n}{2}-1\right)Z_{n}\left(\frac{n}{2}-1;

280: \frac{1}{L_1},\ldots,\frac{1}{L_n}\right).

281: \end{align*} In view of the functional equation \eqref{eq109_8} and the importance of the combination \eqref{eq109_9},

282:  we define the Xi-function as

283: \begin{align}\label{eq109_10}

284: \Xi_n(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)=\sqrt{\prod_{i=1}^n a_i} \pi^{-s}\Gamma(s)

285: Z_n(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n).

286: \end{align}

287: 

288: 

289:  In the study of Casimir

290: effect, the attractive or repulsive nature of the Casimir force, and

291: the geometric configuration of the spacetime that will minimize or

292: maximize the Casimir effect are important issues. In the study of

293: interacting scalar field theory, the sign of the topologically

294: generated mass   determines whether symmetry breaking mechanism

295: occurs. Therefore it is important to study the sign of the

296: Xi-function \eqref{eq109_10} and determine its extrema as a function

297: of $(a_1,\ldots, a_n)$. This paper is devoted to the study of these

298: issues. In fact, the main motivation comes from our recent study

299:   of $\lambda\varphi^4$ interacting fractional Klein--Gordon

300: field theory on a toroidal manifold $T^n\times \R^N$ \cite{e10}. In

301: that study, we find that to the one-loop order, the topological

302: generated mass of a $\alpha$-fractional massless Klein--Gordon field

303: is given by

304: \begin{align*}

305: m_T^2=&\frac{\lambda}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\frac{1}{2^{2\alpha+1}\pi^{2\alpha-\frac{N}{2}}\left[\prod_{i=1}^n

306: L_i\right]}\Gamma\left(\alpha-\frac{N}{2}\right)Z_{n}\left(\alpha-\frac{N}{2};

307: \frac{1}{L_1},\ldots,\frac{1}{L_n}\right)\\

308: =&\frac{\lambda}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\frac{1}{2^{2\alpha+1}\pi^{\frac{n+N}{2}}}\Gamma\left(\frac{n+N}{2}-\alpha\right)

309: Z_{n}\left( \frac{n+N}{2}-\alpha; L_1, \ldots, L_n\right)\nonumber

310: \end{align*}when $\alpha\neq N/2$ or $(n+N)/2$. We need to study the

311: sign of $m_T^2$ as a function of $\alpha, n, N$ and $L_1,\ldots,

312: L_n$ to determine whether symmetry breaking appears. To solve this

313: problem, it is necessary to determine the minimum of $\Xi_n(s;

314: L_1,\ldots, L_n)$ for fixed $\prod_{i=1}^n L_i$ and $s$.

315: 

316: The study of the (local) minima of the general Epstein zeta function

317: $Z_{n}(A;s)$ \eqref{eq109_3} as a function of $A\in

318: \{\text{symmetric positive definite} \; n\times n \; \text{real

319: matrices}\}=\mathcal{P}_n$ with fixed determinant has a long history

320: [15--38]. Such investigation is important from a number of points of

321: view. One can read the introduction of the   recent paper \cite{f11}

322: for an overview of this problem. The local minima of $Z_n(A;s), A\in

323: \mathcal{P}_n, \det A=1$, for $s$ in some domain of $\R$ has only

324: been determined for $n=2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 24$; and the problem is

325: far from being solved. In this paper, we restrict ourselves to a

326: milder problem of determining the minimum of $Z_{n}(A;s)$ in the

327: subspace of positive definite symmetric forms consists of diagonal

328: forms. We give an elementary proof to show that for any $n$ and $s$,

329: if $\prod_{i=1}^n a_i$ is fixed, the minimum of $\Xi_n(s;

330: a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ (and hence of $Z_{n}(s; a_1, \ldots, a_n)$)

331: appears at the point $a_1=\ldots=a_n$. This result implies that if

332: $\Xi_n (s)=\Xi_n(s; 1,\ldots, 1)\geq 0$, then $\Xi_n(s; a_1, \ldots,

333: a_n)\geq 0$ for all $(a_1, \ldots, a_n)$. Therefore,   the problem

334: whether $\Xi_n(s; a_1, \ldots, a_n)$ will be negative for some

335: $(a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ is reduced to  to the problem of whether

336: $\Xi_n(s)$ is negative. In section 3, we give a detail study of the

337: sign of the function $\Xi_n(s)$. We show that for $1\leq n\leq 9$,

338: $\Xi_n(s)$ is negative for all $s\in (0, n/2)$; whereas for $n\geq

339: 10$, there is a nonempty subset of $(0, n/2)$ where $\Xi_n(s)$ is

340: positive. In section 4, we prove that for fixed $s$, when

341: $\sum_{i=1}^n c_i$ is fixed, the function

342: \begin{align}\label{eq1017_8}(c_1,\ldots, c_n)\mapsto Z_n\left(s; e^{c_1},\ldots,

343: e^{c_n}\right)\end{align} is a convex function of any $(n-1)$ of the

344: variables $\{c_1,\ldots,c_n\}$. In fact, we prove a stronger result.

345: We show that for a function of the form

346: $$\mathcal{F}_n(x_1,\ldots, x_n)=\prod_{i=1}^n f(x_i),$$ where

347: $f:\R\rightarrow \R^+$ is a positive twice continuously

348: differentiable function, $\mathcal{F}_n$ is convex   if the function

349: $\log f(x)$ is convex. Finally, the result about the convexity of

350: the function \eqref{eq1017_8} can be used to obtain conclusion on

351: the connectivity and convexity of some regions of $(c_1,\ldots,

352: c_n)$ where $Z_n(s; e^{c_1},\ldots, e^{c_n})$ is negative.

353: 

354: \section{The minimum of Epstein zeta function}

355: In this section, we show that for $s\notin \{ n/2\}\cup\{ 0, -1, -2,

356: \ldots\}$, the function $Z_n(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n), (a_1, \ldots,

357: a_n)\in (\R^+)^n$ has a minimum at $a_1=\ldots=a_n$ when

358: $\prod_{i=1}^n a_i$ is fixed.

359: 

360: 

361: There are various ways to obtain the meromorphic continuation of the

362: Epstein zeta function $Z_n (s; a_1, \ldots, a_n)$ \eqref{eq109_5}.

363: Two of them will be useful to us. The first one has the form (see

364: e.g. \cite{f11}):

365: \begin{align}\label{eq1011_1}

366: &V\pi^{-s}\Gamma(s)Z_n(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)=\Xi_n(s; a_1,\ldots,

367: a_n)\\\nonumber=&-\frac{V}{s}

368: -\frac{V^{-1}}{\left(\frac{n}{2}-s\right)} + V\int_1^{\infty}

369: t^{s-1}\sum_{k\in \Z^n\setminus\{0\}}\exp\left(-\pi t\sum_{i=1}^n

370: [a_i k_i]^2\right)dt\\&+V^{-1}\int_1^{\infty}

371: t^{\frac{n}{2}-s-1}\sum_{k\in \Z^n\setminus\{0\}}\exp\left(-\pi

372: t\sum_{i=1}^n \left[\frac{k_i}{a_i}\right]^2\right)dt,\nonumber

373: \end{align}

374: where $$V=\sqrt{\prod_{i=1}^n a_i}.$$This formula shows clearly the

375: Xi-function $\Xi_n(s;a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ only has simple poles at

376: $s=0$ and $s=\frac{n}{2}$. Moreover, since the gamma function

377: $\Gamma(s)$ has simple poles at $s=0,-1, -2, -3,\ldots$, the Epstein

378: zeta function $Z_n(s; a_1, \ldots, a_n)$ is identically zero at the

379: negative integer points $-1, -2, -3,\ldots$. The second formula is

380: one form of the Chowla-Selberg formula \cite{d19,

381: d20}:\begin{align}\label{eq830_9}

382: &\pi^{-s}\Gamma(s)Z_{n}(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)\\

383: =\nonumber &2a_1^{-2s}\pi^{-s}\Gamma(s)\zeta_R(2s)

384: +2\sum_{j=1}^{n-1}\frac{\pi^{-s+\frac{j}{2}}\Gamma\left(s-\frac{j}{2}\right)}

385: {a_{j+1}^{2s-j}\prod_{l=1}^{j}a_l} \zeta_R(2s-j) +4 \sum_{j=1}^{n-1}

386: \frac{1}{\prod_{l=1}^{j}a_l}\times\\\nonumber&\sum_{\mathbf{k}\in

387: \Z^j\setminus\{\mathbf{0}\}}\sum_{p=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{(pa_{j+1})^{s-\frac{j}{2}}}\left(\sum_{l=1}^j

388: \left[\frac{k_l}{a_l}\right]^2\right)^{\frac{s}{2}-\frac{j}{4}}K_{s-\frac{j}{2}}\left(

389: 2\pi p a_{j+1}\sqrt{\sum_{l=1}^j

390: \left[\frac{k_l}{a_l}\right]^2}\right),

391: \end{align}where $\zeta_R(s)=\sum_{k=1}^{\infty} k^{-s}$ is the

392: Riemann zeta function.

393:  From \eqref{eq830_9}, it is easy to

394: verify that for any $\lambda\in\R^+$,

395: \begin{align*}

396: Z_n(s; \lambda a_1,\ldots, \lambda a_n  )=\lambda^{-2s} Z_n(s; a_1,

397: \ldots, a_n).

398: \end{align*}Therefore, it only makes sense to look for the minimum of

399: $Z_n(s;   a_1,\ldots,  a_n  )$ as a function of $(a_1,\ldots, a_n)$

400: when $V$ is fixed. Without loss of generality, it suffices to

401: consider $V=1$. We are going to make use of \eqref{eq1011_1}  to

402: find the minimum of the Xi-function $\Xi_n(s; a_1, \ldots, a_n)$ as

403: a function of $(a_1,\ldots, a_n)$  for fixed $s\neq 0, n/2$ and when

404: $V=1$.  Since multiplying a constant does not affect the minimum of

405: a function, this will give the minimum of the Epstein zeta function

406: $Z_n(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n )$ as a function of $(a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ for

407: $s\notin \{n/2\}\cup\{0,-1,-2, \ldots\}$ and when $V=1$. By

408: \eqref{eq1011_1}, for fixed $s$ and $V=1$, the minimum of $\Xi_n(s;

409: a_1, \ldots, a_n)$ is the same as the minimum of

410: \begin{align}\label{eq1011_2}

411: \Lambda_n(s;a_1,\ldots, a_n)=&\int_1^{\infty} t^{s-1}\sum_{k\in

412: \Z^n\setminus\{0\}}\exp\left(-\pi t\sum_{i=1}^n [a_i

413: k_i]^2\right)dt\\&+\int_1^{\infty} t^{\frac{n}{2}-s-1}\sum_{k\in

414: \Z^n\setminus\{0\}}\exp\left(-\pi t\sum_{i=1}^n

415: \left[\frac{k_i}{a_i}\right]^2\right)dt.\nonumber

416: \end{align}Define the theta function $\vartheta(t)$ by

417: \begin{align}\label{eq1023_1}

418: \vartheta(t)=\vartheta_3(0, e^{-\pi t})=\sum_{k=-\infty}^{\infty}

419: e^{-\pi t k^2}

420: \end{align}Here $\vartheta_3(z,q)$ is a Jacobi theta function

421: \cite{g1}. The theta function $\vartheta(t)$ satisfies a reflection

422: formula: \begin{align}\label{eq1011_6}

423: \vartheta(t)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{t}}\vartheta\left(\frac{1}{t}\right).

424: \end{align}The theta function \eqref{eq1023_1} can be used to reexpress \eqref{eq1011_2}  as

425: \begin{align}\label{eq1011_2_1}

426: \Lambda_n(s;a_1,\ldots, a_n)=&\int_1^{\infty}

427: t^{s-1}\left(\prod_{i=1}^n

428: \vartheta\left(ta_i^2\right)-1\right)dt\\&+\int_1^{\infty}

429: t^{\frac{n}{2}-s-1}\left(\prod_{i=1}^n

430: \vartheta\left(\frac{t}{a_i^2}\right)-1\right)dt.\nonumber

431: \end{align}

432: To determine the minimum of $\Lambda_n(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)$, we need

433: the following:

434: \begin{proposition}\label{p1}

435: The function $\log\vartheta(e^u)$, $u\in\R$ is strictly convex.

436: Namely, for any $m$ distinct points  $u_1, \ldots, u_m\in\R$ and $m$

437: constants $\lambda_1,\ldots, \lambda_m\in (0,1)$ such that

438: $\sum_{i=1}^m \lambda_i=1$, we have

439: \begin{align*}

440: \log\vartheta \left(\exp\left[\sum_{i=1}^m

441: \lambda_iu_i\right]\right)< \sum_{i=1}^m\lambda_i

442: \log\vartheta(e^{u_i}).

443: \end{align*}

444: \end{proposition}

445: This proposition can be used to prove the main result of this

446: section.

447: \begin{theorem}\label{th1}

448: For fixed $s\in\R\setminus\{0, n/2\}$, the function $\Xi_n(s;

449: a_1,\ldots, a_n)$, where $(a_1,\ldots, a_n)\in (\R^+)^n$ with

450: $\prod_{i=1}^n a_i=1$, has a unique minimum at $a_1=\ldots=a_n=1$.

451: Therefore for fixed $s\in\R\setminus\left(\{n/2\}\cup\{ 0, -1, -2,

452: -3, \ldots\}\right)$, the same statement holds for the function

453: $Z_{n}\left(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n\right)$.

454: \end{theorem}First we show how we prove this theorem from

455: Proposition \ref{p1}.

456: \begin{proof}

457: By the strict convexity of $\log \vartheta(e^u)$ asserted in

458: Proposition \ref{p1}, we find that if $(a_1,\ldots, a_n)\neq

459: (1,\ldots,1)$, then

460: \begin{align*}

461: &\log\prod_{i=1}^n \vartheta\left(a_i^2 t\right)= \sum_{i=1}^n \log

462: \vartheta\left(\exp\left[\log t +\log a_i^2\right]\right) \\>& n

463: \log\vartheta\left(\exp\left\{\frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n\left[\log

464: t+\log a_i^2\right]\right\}\right)= \log \vartheta(t)^n.

465: \end{align*}Therefore,

466: \begin{align}\label{eq1011_3}

467: \prod_{i=1}^n \vartheta\left(a_i^2 t\right)> \vartheta(t)^n.

468: \end{align}

469: Similarly,\begin{align}\label{eq1011_4} \prod_{i=1}^n

470: \vartheta\left(\frac{ t}{a_i^2}\right)> \vartheta(t)^n.

471: \end{align}Since $t^{\beta-1}>0$ for all $t>0$ and $\beta\in\R$ and

472: \begin{align*}

473: \prod_{i=1}^n \vartheta\left(b_i^2 t\right)-1> 0

474: \hspace{0.5cm}\text{for all}\; (b_1,\ldots, b_n)\in (\R^+)^n,

475: \end{align*}we conclude from \eqref{eq1011_2_1}, \eqref{eq1011_3} and \eqref{eq1011_4}

476: that for all $(a_1,\ldots, a_n)\in (\R^+)^n\setminus\{(1,\ldots,

477: 1)\}$ with $\prod_{i=1}^n a_i=1$, the inequality

478: \begin{align*}

479: \Lambda_n(s; a_1, \ldots, a_n)> \Lambda_n(s; 1,\ldots, 1)

480: \end{align*}holds. The  assertion of the theorem follows.

481: \end{proof}

482: Now we return to the  proof of Proposition \ref{p1}.

483: \begin{proof}Let

484: \begin{align}\label{eq1011_5}

485: g(u)&=\log\vartheta(u), \hspace{2.3cm} u\in \R^+,

486: \\f(u)&=g(e^u)=\log\vartheta(e^u),\hspace{1cm}u\in \R.\nonumber

487: \end{align}

488: We need to show that $f$ is strictly convex. Since $f$ is an

489: infinitely differentiable function, we need to show that

490: $f^{\prime\prime}(u)>0$ for all $u\in\R$. First, note that the

491: reflection formula \eqref{eq1011_6} implies that

492: \begin{align}\label{eq1011_7}

493: f(-u)=\frac{u}{2}+f(u).

494: \end{align} Therefore

495: $$f^{\prime\prime}(-u)=f^{\prime\prime}(u).$$ As a result, we only need  to show that $f^{\prime\prime}(u)> 0$

496: for all $u\in\R^+$. By definition,

497: \begin{align*}

498: g'(u)=\frac{\vartheta'(u)}{\vartheta(u)},

499: \hspace{1cm}g^{\prime\prime}(u)=\frac{\vartheta^{\prime\prime}(u)\vartheta(u)-\vartheta'(u)^2}{\vartheta

500: (u)^2},

501: \end{align*}and\begin{align*}

502: f^{\prime\prime}(u) =& e^{2u}g^{\prime\prime}(u)+e^ug'(e^u)\\

503: =&e^{2u}\frac{

504: \vartheta^{\prime\prime}(e^u)\vartheta(e^u)-\vartheta'(e^u)^2+e^{-u}\vartheta(e^u)\vartheta'(e^u)}{\vartheta(e^u)^2}.

505: \end{align*}Hence, we have to prove that for all $v\geq 1$,

506: \begin{align*}h(v)=&\vartheta^{\prime\prime}(v)\vartheta(v)-\vartheta'(v)^2+v^{-1}\vartheta(v)\vartheta'(v)>0.

507: \end{align*}Again by definition,\begin{align}\label{eq1011_9}h(v)

508: =&\sum_{j\in\Z} \pi^2j^4 e^{-\pi v j^2}\sum_{k\in\Z}e^{-\pi v

509: k^2}-\sum_{j\in \Z}\pi j^2 e^{-\pi vj^2}\sum_{k\in\Z} \pi k^2e^{-\pi

510: vk^2} -v^{-1}\sum_{j\in\Z} e^{-\pi v j^2}\sum_{k\in\Z}\pi k^2e^{-\pi

511: vk^2}\\

512: =&\frac{\pi}{2}\sum_{(j,k)\in\Z^2}\left[\pi j^4+\pi k^4-2\pi

513: j^2k^2-\frac{1}{v}(j^2+k^2)\right] e^{-\pi v (j^2+k^2)}.\nonumber

514: \end{align}For fixed $v\geq 1$ and $(j,k)\in \Z^2$, define

515: \begin{align*}

516: C(j,k)  =\pi j^4+\pi k^4-2\pi

517: j^2k^2-\frac{1}{v}(j^2+k^2)=\pi(k^2-j^2)^2-\frac{1}{v}(j^2+k^2).

518: \end{align*} If $C(j,k)>0$ for all $(j,k)\in\Z^2$, it follows directly that $h(v)>0$. However, $C(k,k)=

519: -2v^{-1}k^2\leq 0$, which renders the verification of  $h(v)>0$

520: slightly more complicated. We need to compare the values of $C(j,k)$

521: for different pairs of $(j,k)$. Since

522: $C(j,k)=C(-j,k)=C(j,-k)=C(-j,-k)$ and $C(j,k)=C(k,j)$, we need only

523: to consider $C(j,k)$ as a function of $(j,k)\in \mathbb{N}_0$ with

524: $j\leq k$. Here $\mathbb{N}_0=\mathbb{N}\cup\{0\}$. We claim that

525: \begin{align*}

526: &(a) \; \text{If}\; j\neq k, C(j,k)>0,\\

527: &(b)\; \text{For any}\; k\geq 1, C(k-1,

528: k)+\frac{1}{2}C(k,k)>0.\hspace{6cm}

529: \end{align*} By rewriting $C(j,k)$ as

530: \begin{align*}

531: C(j,k)=\pi j^4-\left(2\pi k^2+\frac{1}{v}\right)j^2+\pi

532: k^4-\frac{k^2}{v},

533: \end{align*}  we  see that for fixed $k$, $C(j,k)$ is decreasing if

534: $j\in [0, k]$. Therefore, to prove $(a)$, it suffices to verify that

535: $C(k-1, k)>0$. Since $C(k,k)\leq 0$, this will follow if we prove

536: $(b)$. Now for $v\geq 1$, the function

537: \begin{align*}

538: q(k)=C(k-1,k)+\frac{1}{2}C(k,k)

539: =&\pi(4k^2-4k+1)-\frac{1}{v}(2k^2-2k+1)-\frac{k^2}{v}\\

540: \geq &\pi(4k^2-4k+1)-(3k^2-2k+1)\\

541: =&(4\pi -3)k^2 -2(2\pi-1)k +\pi-1

542: \end{align*}is  increasing for $k\geq 1$, and $q(1)= \pi-2>0$,  this

543: proves $(b)$. Returning to the proof of $h(v)>0$, we write the

544: summation over $(j,k)\in\Z^2$ in \eqref{eq1011_9} as

545: \begin{align*}

546: \frac{\pi}{2}\Biggl\{\sum_{\substack{(j,k)\in \Z^2\\|j-k|\geq

547: 2}}+\sum_{\substack{(j,k)\in \Z^2\\|j-k|=

548: 1}}+\sum_{\substack{(j,k)\in \Z^2\\j=k}}\Biggr\}C(j,k)e^{-\pi v

549: (j^2+k^2)}.

550: \end{align*}By $(a)$, the first sum is strictly positive. Now since $C(0,0)=0$ and

551: $C(\pm j,\pm k)=C(j,k)=C(k,j)$, the last two sums can be written as

552: \begin{align*}

553: 2\pi\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}C(k-1, k) e^{-\pi((k-1)^2+k^2)}

554: +\pi\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}C(k,k)e^{-2\pi k^2}.

555: \end{align*}Using the fact that $e^{-x}$ is a decreasing function,

556: we find that this term is larger than

557: \begin{align*}

558: 2\pi\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\left(C(k-1,1)+\frac{1}{2}C(k,k)\right)

559: e^{-2\pi k^2},

560: \end{align*}which, by $(b)$, is positive. This concludes the proof

561: that $h(v)>0$, and therefore the assertion of the proposition

562: follows.

563: \end{proof}

564: 

565: \section{The sign of Epstein zeta function} In this section,

566: we are going to study the sign of the Xi-function $\Xi_n(s;

567: a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ when $s\in\R \setminus \{0, n/2\}$. First, since

568: $\pi^{-s}\Gamma(s)>0$ for $s>0$ and it is obvious from the power

569: series definition of $Z_{n}(s; a_1, \ldots, a_n)$ \eqref{eq109_5}

570: that $Z_n(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)>0$ for all $s>n/2$, we immediately

571: deduce that

572: $$\Xi_n(s; a_1, \ldots, a_n)>0 \hspace{1cm}\text{for all}\;\;

573: s>\frac{n}{2} \;\;\text{and}\;\;(a_1,\ldots, a_n)\in (\R^+)^n.$$

574: From the functional equation \eqref{eq109_8}, we then obtain

575: $$\Xi_n(s; a_1, \ldots, a_n)>0 \hspace{1cm}\text{for all}\;\;

576: s<0 \;\;\text{and}\;\;(a_1,\ldots, a_n)\in (\R^+)^n.$$In other

577: words, $\Xi_n(s; a_1, \ldots, a_n)>0 $ for all $s\in (-\infty,

578: 0)\cup(n/2, \infty)$. For the remaining case where $s\in (0,n/2)$,

579: the sign of the function $\Xi_n(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ is not trivial.

580: Using the formula \eqref{eq1011_1}, we find that

581:  around the two simple poles $s=0$ and $s=\frac{n}{2}$,

582: \begin{align*}

583: \Xi_n(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)=&-\frac{V}{s}+O(1)\hspace{1cm}\text{as}\;\; s\rightarrow 0,\\

584: \Xi_n(s; a_1, \ldots,

585: a_n)=&-\frac{V^{-1}}{\frac{n}{2}-s}+O(1)\hspace{1cm}\text{as}\;\;

586: s\rightarrow \frac{n}{2}.

587: \end{align*}Therefore we can conclude that\begin{proposition}\label{p2} For any $a=(a_1,\ldots, a_n)\in(\R^+)^n$, one

588: can find a right nonempty neighbourhood  $I_1(a)=(0, s_{1}(a))$ of

589: $s=0$ and a left nonempty neighbourhood $I_2(a)=\left(s_{2}(a),

590: \frac{n}{2}\right)$ of $n/2$ such that

591: \begin{align*}

592: \Xi_n(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)<0, \hspace{1cm}\text{for all}\;\; s\in

593: I_1(a)\cup I_2(a).

594: \end{align*}\end{proposition}In fact, when $n=1$, using the fact that

595: $$\Xi_1(s;a)=\sqrt{a}

596: \pi^{-s}\Gamma(s)Z_1(s;a)=2a^{-2s+\frac{1}{2}}\pi^{-s}\Gamma(s)\zeta_R(2s),$$

597:  it is easy to verify a stronger result:

598: \begin{proposition}

599: $$\Xi_1(s;a)<0,\hspace{1cm}\text{for all}\;\; s\in \left(0,

600: \frac{1}{2}\right).$$

601: \end{proposition}\begin{proof}

602: It suffices to show that $\zeta_R(s)<0$ for all $s\in (0,1)$. For

603: $s>0$, there is a well-known formula

604: \begin{align*}

605: \sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k^s}=\left(1-2^{1-s}\right)\zeta_R(s).

606: \end{align*}The alternating series on the left hand side is

607: convergent and positive for all $s>0$. However, for $s\in (0,1)$,

608: $2^{1-s}>1$. Therefore, $\zeta_R(s)<0$ for all $s\in (0,1)$. This

609: completes the proof.

610: \end{proof}In the study of the zeros of Riemann zeta function, this result asserts that $\zeta_R(s)$ has no nontrivial

611: zeros in $(0, 1)$, a necessary condition for the validity of Riemann

612: hypothesis. For $n\geq 2$, in view of Proposition \ref{p2}, we find

613: that a necessary condition for the validity of the generalized

614: Riemann hypothesis  for $Z_n(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ at a fixed

615: $(a_1,\ldots, a_n)\in (\R^+)^n$,  is that  $\Xi_n(s; a_1,\ldots,

616: a_n)<0$ for all $s\in (0, n/2)$. However, this is not true for all

617: $(a_1,\ldots, a_n)\in (\R^+)^n$. In fact, we can show that

618: \begin{proposition}\label{p4}

619: Given $n\geq 2$, $j\in \{1,\ldots, n\}$ and $s\in (0,n/2)$, if we

620: fix $a_1,\ldots, a_{j-1}$, $a_{j+1},\ldots, a_n$ and vary $a_j$,

621: then as $a_j$ is large enough, $\Xi_n(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ is

622: positive.

623: \end{proposition}

624: \begin{proof}Since $\Xi_n (s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ is symmetric in the

625: variables $a_1,\ldots, a_n$, it is sufficient to show that given

626: $n\geq 2$ and $s\in (0,n/2)$, there exists $j\in \{1,\ldots, n\}$

627: such that if we fix $a_1,\ldots, a_{j-1}$, $a_{j+1},\ldots, a_n$ and

628: vary $a_j$, then as $a_j$ is large enough, $\Xi_n(s; a_1,\ldots,

629: a_n)$ is positive.

630: 

631:  First we consider the case $s=\frac{m}{2}$, where $m\in

632: \{1,2,\ldots, n-1\}$. Equation \eqref{eq830_9} and the fact that

633: (see \cite{e10})

634: \begin{align*}\pi^{-s}\Gamma\left(s\right)\zeta_R(2s)

635: =& -\frac{1}{2}\left\{\frac{1}{s}+\log

636: (4\pi)+\psi(1)\right\}+O(s),\hspace{1cm}\text{as}\;\; s\rightarrow

637: 0,\\\pi^{-s}\Gamma\left(s\right)\zeta_R(2s) =&

638: \frac{1}{2}\left\{\frac{1}{s-\frac{1}{2}}-\log

639: (4\pi)-\psi(1)\right\}+O\left(s-\frac{1}{2}\right),\hspace{1cm}\text{as}\;\;

640: s\rightarrow \frac{1}{2},\nonumber

641: \end{align*}

642: give

643: \begin{align}\label{eq1023_2}

644: &V^{-1}\Xi_n\left(\frac{m}{2}; a_1,\ldots,

645: a_n\right)=\frac{1}{\prod_{l=1}^m

646: a_l}\left\{\log\frac{a_{m+1}}{a_m}-\log(4\pi)-\psi(1)\right\}\\

647: +\nonumber &2\sum_{j\in\{0,1,\ldots,n-1\}\setminus\{m-1,

648: m\}}\frac{\pi^\frac{j-m}{2}\Gamma\left(\frac{m-j}{2}\right)}

649: {a_{j+1}^{m-j}\prod_{l=1}^{j}a_l} \zeta_R(m-j) +4 \sum_{j=1}^{n-1}

650: \frac{1}{\prod_{l=1}^{j}a_l}\times\nonumber\\\nonumber&\sum_{\mathbf{k}\in

651: \Z^j\setminus\{\mathbf{0}\}}\sum_{p=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{(pa_{j+1})^{\frac{m-j}{2}}}\left(\sum_{l=1}^j

652: \left[\frac{k_l}{a_l}\right]^2\right)^{\frac{m-j}{4}}K_{\frac{m-j}{2}}\left(

653: 2\pi p a_{j+1}\sqrt{\sum_{l=1}^j

654: \left[\frac{k_l}{a_l}\right]^2}\right).

655: \end{align}Since the function $\pi^{-s}\Gamma(s)\zeta_R(2s)$ is

656: strictly positive for $s<0$ or $s>\frac{1}{2}$ and the function

657: $K_s(z)$ is positive for all $s\in\R$ and $z\in \R^+$, the last two

658: terms of \eqref{eq1023_2} are always positive. The sign of the first

659: term depend on the ratio $a_{m+1}/a_m$. It is easy to see that   if

660: $a_1,\ldots, a_m, a_{m+2},\ldots, a_n$ are kept fixed, then for

661: $a_{m+1}$ large, the first term is positive and therefore

662: $\Xi_{n}\left(\frac{m}{2}; a_1, \ldots, a_n\right)>0$. This

663: establishes the proposition when $s\in \{m/2\,:\, m=1,2,\ldots,

664: n-1\}$.

665: 

666: For the general case,  given $s\in (0, n/2)\setminus\{m/2\,:\,

667: m=1,2,\ldots, n-1\}$,  there is a unique $m\in \{0, \ldots, n-1\}$

668: such that $0<2s-m<1$. Equation \eqref{eq830_9} gives

669: \begin{align*}

670: &V^{-1}\Xi_n(s; a_1,\ldots,

671: a_n)=\frac{\pi^{\frac{m}{2}-s}\Gamma\left(s-\frac{m}{2}\right)}

672: {a_{m+1}^{2s-m}\prod_{l=1}^{m}a_l} \zeta_R(2s-m)\\

673: \nonumber

674: &+2\sum_{j=0}^{m-1}\frac{\pi^{\frac{j}{2}-s}\Gamma\left(s-\frac{j}{2}\right)}

675: {a_{j+1}^{2s-j}\prod_{l=1}^{j}a_l} \zeta_R(2s-j)

676: +2\sum_{j=m+1}^{n-1}\frac{\pi^{\frac{j}{2}-s}\Gamma\left(s-\frac{j}{2}\right)}

677: {a_{j+1}^{2s-j}\prod_{l=1}^{j}a_l} \zeta_R(2s-j) +4 \sum_{j=1}^{n-1}

678: \frac{1}{\prod_{l=1}^{j}a_l}\times\\\nonumber&\sum_{\mathbf{k}\in

679: \Z^j\setminus\{\mathbf{0}\}}\sum_{p=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{(pa_{j+1})^{s-\frac{j}{2}}}\left(\sum_{l=1}^j

680: \left[\frac{k_l}{a_l}\right]^2\right)^{\frac{s}{2}-\frac{j}{4}}K_{s-\frac{j}{2}}\left(

681: 2\pi p a_{j+1}\sqrt{\sum_{l=1}^j

682: \left[\frac{k_l}{a_l}\right]^2}\right).

683: \end{align*}Only the first term is negative. If $a_1,\ldots, a_{m},

684: a_{m+2},\ldots, a_n$ are fixed and $a_{m+1}\rightarrow \infty$, the

685: second term is fixed but the first term approaches zero. Therefore,

686:  $\Xi_n(s; a_1,\ldots,

687: a_n)>0$ when $a_{m+1}$ is large enough, and our assertion is proved.

688: 

689: We would like to remark that the case  $s=\frac{m}{2}$, where $m\in

690: \{1,2,\ldots, n-1\}$ can actually be deduced from the general case

691: $s\in (0, n/2)\setminus\{m/2\,:\, m=1,2,\ldots, n-1\}$ using the

692: joint continuity of $\Xi_n(s; a_1, \ldots, a_n)$ as a function of

693: $s$ and $(a_1,\ldots, a_n)$.

694: \end{proof} This proposition shows that if $s\in (0, n/2)$, then when one of the ratios between the

695: $a_i$'s, $1\leq i\leq n$ is large, the Epstein zeta function

696: $Z_{n}(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ is positive, and therefore the

697: generalized Riemann hypothesis does not hold for this zeta function.

698: It is then interesting to ask whether the Riemann hypothesis will

699: still be valid for some $(a_1,\ldots, a_n)\in (\R^+)^n$. Another

700: interesting question which is related to our problem \cite{e10} of

701: determining whether there exists symmetry breaking mechanisms in an

702: interacting fractional Klein--Gordon field is, for what values of

703: $s$, the Xi-function $\Xi_n(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ will be negative

704: for some $(a_1,\ldots, a_n)$. Recall that we have proved in section

705: 2 that for any fixed $s$, the minimum of $Z_{n}(s; a_1,\ldots,

706: a_n)$, as a function of $(a_1,\ldots, a_n)\in (\R^+)^n$ with

707: $\prod_{i=1} a_i$ fixed, appears at the point $a_1=\ldots=a_n$.

708: Therefore to answer   these two questions, we need  to  study  the

709: function $\Xi_n(s)=\Xi_n(s; 1,\ldots, 1)$ first.

710: 

711: From \eqref{eq1011_1}, we find that

712: \begin{align}\label{eq1015_3}

713: \Xi_n(s)=-\frac{1}{s} -\frac{1}{\frac{n}{2}-s}+\int_1^{\infty}

714: t^{s-1}\left(\vartheta(t)^n-1\right)dt+\int_1^{\infty}

715: t^{\frac{n}{2}-1-s}\left(\vartheta(t)^n-1\right)dt.

716: \end{align}

717: In order to have a more unified treatment for all $n$, we define

718: $\hat{\Xi}_n(s)=\Xi_n\left(\frac{ns}{2}\right)$. Then

719:  \begin{align}\label{eq1015_10}

720: \hat{\Xi}_n(s)=-\frac{2}{n}\left(\frac{1}{s}

721: +\frac{1}{1-s}\right)+\int_1^{\infty}

722: t^{\frac{ns}{2}-1}\left(\vartheta(t)^n-1\right)dt+\int_1^{\infty}

723: t^{\frac{n}{2}(1-s)-1}\left(\vartheta(t)^n-1\right)dt.

724: \end{align} This formula shows that for all $s\in

725: (0,1)$ and $n\in \mathbb{N}$,

726: \begin{align}\label{eq1015_1}\hat{\Xi}_{n+1}(s)

727: >\hat{\Xi}_{n}(s).\end{align} Moreover, for any fixed $s$, since

728: \begin{align*}

729: \frac{2}{n}\left(\frac{1}{s}+\frac{1}{1-s}\right) \longrightarrow 0

730: \hspace{1cm}\text{as}\;\; n\rightarrow \infty,

731: \end{align*}and

732: \begin{align*}

733: &\int_1^{\infty} t^{\frac{ns}{2}-1}

734: \left(\vartheta(t)^n-1\right)dt+\int_1^{\infty}t^{\frac{n}{2}(1-s)-1}\left(\vartheta(t)^n-1\right)dt

735: \\\geq & \int_1^{\infty} t^{\frac{s}{2}-1}

736: \left(\vartheta(t)^n-1\right)dt+\int_1^{\infty}t^{\frac{1}{2}(1-s)-1}\left(\vartheta(t)^n-1\right)dt>0,

737: \end{align*}therefore $\hat{\Xi}_n(s)$ becomes positive when $n$ is

738: large enough. In fact for $s=1/2$, a lengthy analysis (31 pages) has

739: been done in \cite{g2} and it was proved that\begin{lemma}\label{l1}

740: \begin{align*}\begin{cases}\Xi_n\left(\frac{n}{4}\right)=\hat{\Xi}_n\left(\frac{1}{2}\right)<0,

741: \hspace{1cm}\text{if}\;\;& 1\leq n\leq 9;\\

742: \Xi_n\left(\frac{n}{4}\right)=\hat{\Xi}_n\left(\frac{1}{2}\right)>0,

743: \hspace{1cm}\text{if}\;\; & n\geq 10.

744: \end{cases}

745: \end{align*}\end{lemma}\begin{proof}Here we provide a much shorter proof of this result.

746: Using the inequality \eqref{eq1015_1}, we need

747: only to show that

748: \begin{align}\label{eq1015_2}

749: \Xi_9\left(\frac{9}{4}\right)<0

750: \hspace{1cm}\text{and}\hspace{1cm}\Xi_{10}\left(\frac{5}{2}\right)>0.

751: \end{align}Using the incomplete gamma function

752: \begin{align*}

753: \Gamma(\beta,x)=\int_x^{\infty} t^{\beta-1} e^{-t} dt,

754: \hspace{1cm}x>0,

755: \end{align*}we can rewrite  \eqref{eq1015_3} as

756: \begin{align}\label{eq1015_4}

757: \Xi_n(s)=&-\frac{1}{s}-\frac{1}{\frac{n}{2}-s}

758: +\sum_{k\in\Z^n\setminus\{0\}} \left(\pi

759: |k|^2\right)^{-s}\Gamma\left( s, \pi|k|^2\right)

760: \\&+\sum_{k\in\Z^n\setminus\{0\}} \left(\pi

761: |k|^2\right)^{-\frac{n}{2}+s}\Gamma\left( \frac{n}{2}-s,

762: \pi|k|^2\right),\nonumber

763: \end{align}where for $k\in\Z^n$,

764: $|k|^2=\sum_{i=1}^n k_i^2$. We need to obtain upper and lower bounds

765: for $\Gamma(\beta, x)$. Using integration by parts, it is easy to

766: show that when $\beta>0$,

767: \begin{align*}

768: \Gamma(\beta, x)=x^{\beta-1}e^{-x}\sum_{j=0}^m \frac{\prod_{i=1}^j

769: (\beta-i)}{x^j}+\left[\prod_{i=1}^{m+1}(\beta-i)\right]\int_x^{\infty}

770: t^{\beta-m-2}e^{-t}dt.

771: \end{align*}From this, we find that

772: \begin{align}\label{eq1015_8}

773: \Gamma(\beta,x)\leq x^{\beta-1}e^{-x}\sum_{j=0}^{[\beta]}

774: \frac{\prod_{i=1}^j (\beta-i)}{x^j}, \hspace{1cm}\Gamma(\beta,x)\geq

775: x^{\beta-1}e^{-x}\sum_{j=0}^{[\beta]+1} \frac{\prod_{i=1}^j

776: (\beta-i)}{x^j}.

777: \end{align}Therefore from    \eqref{eq1015_4}, we have

778: \begin{align*}

779: \Xi_9\left(\frac{9}{4}\right)\leq

780: -\frac{8}{9}+2\sum_{k\in\Z^9\setminus\{0\}}\left(\pi|k|^2\right)^{-1}e^{-\pi|k|^2}\sum_{j=0}^{2}

781: \frac{\prod_{i=1}^j \left(\frac{9}{4}-i\right)}{(\pi|k|^2)^j}.

782: \end{align*}For the summation over $k\in \Z^9\setminus\{0\}$, we

783: single out the 18 terms that contribute to $|k|=1$, i.e. we write

784: \begin{align}\label{eq1015_7}

785: &\sum_{k\in\Z^9\setminus\{0\}}\left(\pi|k|^2\right)^{-1}e^{-\pi|k|^2}\sum_{j=0}^{2}

786: \frac{\prod_{i=1}^j \left(\frac{9}{4}-i\right)}{(\pi|k|^2)^j}\\

787: =&\frac{18}{\pi}e^{-\pi}\sum_{j=0}^2\frac{\prod_{i=1}^j

788: \left(\frac{9}{4}-i\right)}{\pi^j}+\sum_{k\in\Z^9\setminus\{k\,:\,

789: |k|=0\;\text{or}\;

790: 1\}}\left(\pi|k|^2\right)^{-1}e^{-\pi|k|^2}\sum_{j=0}^{2}

791: \frac{\prod_{i=1}^j

792: \left(\frac{9}{4}-i\right)}{(\pi|k|^2)^j}.\nonumber

793: \end{align}The first term of \eqref{eq1015_7} gives

794: \begin{align}\label{eq1015_6}

795: \frac{18}{\pi}e^{-\pi}\sum_{j=0}^2\frac{\prod_{i=1}^j

796: \left(\frac{9}{4}-i\right)}{\pi^j}=0.3540;

797: \end{align}whereas the second term of \eqref{eq1015_7} is

798: \begin{align}\label{eq1015_5}

799: &\sum_{k\in\Z^9\setminus\{k\,:\, |k|=0\;\text{or}\;

800: 1\}}\left(\pi|k|^2\right)^{-1}e^{-\pi|k|^2}\sum_{j=0}^{2}

801: \frac{\prod_{i=1}^j \left(\frac{9}{4}-i\right)}{(\pi|k|^2)^j}\\\leq

802: & \frac{1}{2\pi}\sum_{j=0}^{2} \frac{\prod_{i=1}^j

803: \left(\frac{9}{4}-i\right)}{(2\pi

804: )^j}\sum_{k\in\Z^9\setminus\{k\,:\, |k|=0\;\text{or}\; 1\}}

805: e^{-\pi|k|^2}.\nonumber

806: \end{align}Using a simple inequality

807: \begin{align*}

808: \exp\left(-\pi \sum_{i=1}^n k_i^2\right)\leq

809: \exp\left(-\pi\sum_{i=1}^n |k_i|\right),

810: \end{align*}we find that

811: \begin{align*}

812: \sum_{k\in\Z^9\setminus\{k\,:\, |k|=0\;\text{or}\; 1\}}

813: e^{-\pi|k|^2}=&\sum_{k\in\Z^9} e^{-\pi|k|^2}-1-18e^{-\pi}\\

814: \leq & \sum_{k\in\Z^9} e^{-\pi\sum_{i=1}^9|k_i|}-1-18e^{-\pi}\\

815: =&\left(1+2\sum_{m=1}^{\infty}e^{-\pi m}\right)^9-1-18e^{-\pi}\\

816: =&\left(\frac{e^{\pi}+1}{e^{\pi}-1}\right)^9-1-18e^{-\pi}.

817: \end{align*}Therefore, the term \eqref{eq1015_5} is bounded above by

818: \begin{align*}

819: \frac{1}{2\pi}\sum_{j=0}^{2} \frac{\prod_{i=1}^j

820: \left(\frac{9}{4}-i\right)}{(2\pi

821: )^j}\left(\left(\frac{e^{\pi}+1}{e^{\pi}-1}\right)^9-1-18e^{-\pi}\right)=0.0769.

822: \end{align*}Combine with \eqref{eq1015_6}, we find that

823: \eqref{eq1015_7} is bounded above by

824: \begin{align*}

825: 0.3540+0.0769=0.4309<\frac{4}{9}.

826: \end{align*}Therefore, $\Xi_9(9/4)<0$.

827: Now for $\Xi_{10}(5/2)$, a similar argument but using the lower

828: bound in \eqref{eq1015_8} for the incomplete gamma function gives

829: \begin{align*}

830: \Xi_{10}\left(\frac{5}{2}\right)>&-\frac{4}{5}+2\sum_{k\in\Z^{10}\setminus\{0\}}

831: \left(\pi|k|^2\right)^{-1}e^{-\pi|k|^2}\sum_{j=0}^{3}

832: \frac{\prod_{i=1}^j \left(\frac{5}{2}-i\right)}{(\pi|k|^2)^j}\\

833: >&-\frac{4}{5}+\frac{40}{\pi}e^{-\pi}\sum_{j=0}^{3}

834: \frac{\prod_{i=1}^j \left(\frac{5}{2}-i\right)}{\pi ^j}=0.04808>0.

835: \end{align*}

836: 

837: 

838: 

839: 

840: As a side remark, using  standard mathematics softwares such as

841: MATLAB and MATHEMATICA, it is easy to  compute $\Xi_n(s)$ to any

842: desired degree of accuracy from formula \eqref{eq1015_3} or

843: \eqref{eq1015_4}. Up to $10^{-12}$, we have

844: \begin{align*}

845: \Xi_9\left(\frac{9}{4}\right)=-0.065884758538,\\

846: \Xi_{10}\left(\frac{5}{2}\right) =0.205903040487.

847: \end{align*}

848: 

849: \end{proof}

850: 

851: Lemma \ref{l1}, Proposition \ref{p2} and the inequality

852: \eqref{eq1015_1} immediately implies that

853: \begin{proposition}\label{p5}

854: For all $n\geq 10$, the  sets

855: \begin{align}\label{eq1016_1}I_{n,+}=&\left\{ s\in(0, n/2)\,:\,

856: \Xi_{n}(s)>0\right\},\\ \label{eq1017_1} I_{n,-}=&\left\{ s\in(0,

857: n/2)\,:\, \Xi_{n}(s)<0\right\}\end{align}are open nonempty subsets

858: of $(0, n/2)$. Moreover, $n/4\in I_{n,+}$.

859: \end{proposition}In fact, from the functional equation

860: $\Xi_n(s)=\Xi_n((n/2)-s)$, one can even conclude that the intervals

861: $I_{n,+}$ and $I_{n,-}$ are symmetric with respect to the point

862: $n/4$, i.e.

863: $$\frac{n}{2}-I_{n,+}:=\left\{\frac{n}{2}-s\,:\, s\in I_{n,+}\right\}=I_{n,+}$$ and similarly for

864: $I_{n,-}$. Since $$\lim_{s\rightarrow 0^+}\Xi_n(s)=-\infty,$$ there

865: must exists an odd number of points $\gamma_{n,1}$, $\ldots$,

866: $\gamma_{n,2m_n+1}$ so that $0<\gamma_{n,1}<\gamma_{n,2}\leq

867: \gamma_{n,3}<\ldots<\gamma_{n, 2m_n}\leq \gamma_{n,2m_n+1}<n/4$ and

868: $$I_{n, +}= \bigcup_{i=1}^{m_n}\left( \gamma_{n,2i-1}, \gamma_{n,

869: 2i}\right) \bigcup \left(\gamma_{n, 2m_n+1}, \frac{n}{2}-\gamma_{n,

870: 2m_n+1}\right)\bigcup_{i=1}^{m_n}\left(\frac{n}{2}- \gamma_{n,2i},

871: \frac{n}{2}-\gamma_{n, 2i-1}\right).$$ For $n\leq 9$, Lemma \ref{l1}

872: is not sufficient to show that  $\Xi_n(s)<0$ for all $s\in (0,

873: n/2)$. Nevertheless, one can employ the same method as the proof in

874: Lemma \ref{l1} to show that

875: \begin{proposition}\label{p30}

876: $\Xi_9(s)<0$ for all $s\in (0, 9/2)$.

877: \end{proposition}

878: 

879: 

880: 

881: Then the inequality \eqref{eq1015_1} shows that

882: \begin{proposition}\label{p6}

883: For all $1\leq n\leq 9$, the function $\Xi_{n}(s)$ is negative for

884: all $s\in (0, n/2)$.

885: \end{proposition}

886: 

887: 

888: 

889: We give the proof of Proposition \ref{p30} here.

890: \begin{proof}By the reflection formula $\Xi_9(s)=\Xi_9((9/2)-s)$, it

891: is sufficient to show that $\Xi_9(s)<0$ for all $s\in (0, 9/4]$.

892: Let

893: \begin{align*}

894: \mathcal{Z}_1(s)=-\frac{1}{s}-\frac{1}{\frac{9}{2}-s}

895: \end{align*}and

896: \begin{align*}

897: \mathcal{Z}_2(s)=\int_1^{\infty}

898: t^{s-1}\left(\vartheta(t)^9-1\right)dt+\int_1^{\infty}

899: t^{\frac{9}{2}-s-1}\left(\vartheta(t)^9-1\right)dt,

900: \end{align*}so that $\Xi_9(s)=\mathcal{Z}_1(s)+\mathcal{Z}_2(s)$. By taking derivatives with respect to $s$,

901: it is easy to verify that as functions of $s$, $\mathcal{Z}_1(s)$ is

902: increasing on $(0,9/4]$ and $\mathcal{Z}_2(s)$ is decreasing on $[0,

903: 9/4]$. Using the arguments in the proof of Lemma \ref{l1}, we find

904: that

905: \begin{align*}

906: \mathcal{Z}_2(0)\leq& \frac{18}{\pi}

907: e^{-\pi}+\frac{1}{2\pi}\left(\left(\frac{e^{\pi}+1}{e^{\pi}-1}\right)^9-1-18e^{-\pi}\right)

908: \\&+\frac{18}{\pi}e^{-\pi}\sum_{j=0}^{4} \frac{\prod_{i=1}^j

909: \left(\frac{9}{2}-i\right)}{\pi^j}+\frac{1}{2\pi}\sum_{j=0}^{4}

910: \frac{\prod_{i=1}^j \left(\frac{9}{2}-i\right)}{(2\pi

911: )^j}\left(\left(\frac{e^{\pi}+1}{e^{\pi}-1}\right)^9-1-18e^{-\pi}\right)\\=&1.2926.

912: \end{align*}Now we want to find an $x$ so that

913: $\mathcal{Z}_1(x)<-1.2926$. By try and error method, we find that

914: $x=0.95$ satisfies the required condition. In fact,

915: \begin{align*}

916: \mathcal{Z}_1(0.95)=-1.3343.

917: \end{align*}Therefore, for all $s\in (0, 0.95]$,

918: \begin{align*}

919: \Xi_9(s)=\mathcal{Z}_1(s)+\mathcal{Z}_2(s)\leq

920: \mathcal{Z}_1(0.95)+\mathcal{Z}_2(0)\leq -0.0417<0.

921: \end{align*}Repeating these steps, we have first

922: \begin{align*}

923: \mathcal{Z}_2(0.95)\leq & \frac{18}{\pi}

924: e^{-\pi}+\frac{1}{2\pi}\left(\left(\frac{e^{\pi}+1}{e^{\pi}-1}\right)^9-1-18e^{-\pi}\right)

925: \\&+\frac{18}{\pi}e^{-\pi}\sum_{j=0}^{3} \frac{\prod_{i=1}^j

926: \left(3.55-i\right)}{\pi^j}+\frac{1}{2\pi}\sum_{j=0}^{3}

927: \frac{\prod_{i=1}^j \left(3.55-i\right)}{(2\pi

928: )^j}\left(\left(\frac{e^{\pi}+1}{e^{\pi}-1}\right)^9-1-18e^{-\pi}\right)\\&=0.9728.

929: \end{align*}Then by try and error, we find that

930: \begin{align*}

931: \mathcal{Z}_1(1.55)=-0.9841.

932: \end{align*}Therefore, for all $s\in [0.95, 1.55]$,

933: \begin{align*}

934: \Xi_9(s)=\mathcal{Z}_1(s)+\mathcal{Z}_2(s)\leq

935: \mathcal{Z}_1(1.55)+\mathcal{Z}_2(0.95)\leq -0.0113<0.

936: \end{align*}Repeating again, we find that

937: \begin{align*}

938: \mathcal{Z}_2(1.55)\leq & \frac{18}{\pi}

939: e^{-\pi}\sum_{j=0}^{1}\frac{\prod_{i=1}^j

940: \left(1.55-i\right)}{\pi^j}+\frac{1}{2\pi}\sum_{j=0}^{1}\frac{\prod_{i=1}^j

941: \left(1.55-i\right)}{(2\pi)^j}\left(\left(\frac{e^{\pi}+1}{e^{\pi}-1}\right)^9-1-18e^{-\pi}\right)

942: \\&+\frac{18}{\pi}e^{-\pi}\sum_{j=0}^{2} \frac{\prod_{i=1}^j

943: \left(2.95-i\right)}{\pi^j}+\frac{1}{2\pi}\sum_{j=0}^{2}

944: \frac{\prod_{i=1}^j \left(2.95-i\right)}{(2\pi

945: )^j}\left(\left(\frac{e^{\pi}+1}{e^{\pi}-1}\right)^9-1-18e^{-\pi}\right)\\=&0.8943,

946: \end{align*}and\begin{align*}

947: \mathcal{Z}_1(2)=-0.9.

948: \end{align*}Therefore, for all $s\in [1.55, 2]$,

949: \begin{align*}

950: \Xi_9(s)=\mathcal{Z}_1(s)+\mathcal{Z}_2(s)\leq

951: \mathcal{Z}_1(2)+\mathcal{Z}_2(1.55)\leq -0.0057<0.

952: \end{align*}Finally,

953: \begin{align*}

954: \mathcal{Z}_2(2)\leq & \frac{18}{\pi}

955: e^{-\pi}\sum_{j=0}^{2}\frac{\prod_{i=1}^j

956: \left(2-i\right)}{\pi^j}+\frac{1}{2\pi}\sum_{j=0}^{2}\frac{\prod_{i=1}^j

957: \left(2-i\right)}{(2\pi)^j}\left(\left(\frac{e^{\pi}+1}{e^{\pi}-1}\right)^9-1-18e^{-\pi}\right)

958: \\&+\frac{18}{\pi}e^{-\pi}\sum_{j=0}^{2} \frac{\prod_{i=1}^j

959: \left(2.5-i\right)}{\pi^j}+\frac{1}{2\pi}\sum_{j=0}^{2}

960: \frac{\prod_{i=1}^j \left(2.5-i\right)}{(2\pi

961: )^j}\left(\left(\frac{e^{\pi}+1}{e^{\pi}-1}\right)^9-1-18e^{-\pi}\right)\\

962: =&0.8649,

963: \end{align*}and

964: \begin{align*}

965: \mathcal{Z}_1(2.25)=-0.8889,

966: \end{align*}which implies that for all $s\in[2, 2.25]$,

967: \begin{align*}\Xi_9(s)=\mathcal{Z}_1(s)+\mathcal{Z}_2(s)\leq

968: \mathcal{Z}_1(2.25)+\mathcal{Z}_2(2)\leq -0.0240<0.

969: \end{align*}This completes the proof of the proposition.

970: \end{proof}

971: 

972: \begin{figure}\centering \epsfxsize=.49\linewidth

973: \epsffile{graph1.eps}  \epsfxsize=.49\linewidth

974: \epsffile{graph2.eps}\caption{The graphs of

975: $\hat{\Xi}_n(s)=\Xi_n\left(\frac{ns}{2}\right)$ for $s\in (0,1)$.}

976: \end{figure}

977:  In Figure 1, we show the

978: graphs of $\hat{\Xi}_n(s)=\Xi_n(ns/2)$ for $s\in (0, 1)$ and $1\leq

979: n\leq 10$. From the graphs, we see that for $1\leq n\leq 10$,

980: $\hat{\Xi}_n(s)$ is increasing for $s\in (0, 1/2)$, decreasing for

981: $s\in (1/2, 1)$, and $s=1/2$ is a local maximum of $\hat{\Xi}_n(s)$.

982: One would tend to jump into the conclusion that this will be true

983: for all $n$. However, this is not the case. Since $\hat{\Xi}_n(s)$

984: satisfies the functional equation $\hat{\Xi}_n(s)=\hat{\Xi}_n(1-s)$,

985: it is easy to verify that $\hat{\Xi}_n'(1/2)=0$ and therefore

986: $s=1/2$ is indeed a local extremum of $\hat{\Xi}_n(s)$. In order to

987: determine the nature of this extremum, it is necessary to look at

988: the second derivative of $\hat{\Xi}_n(s)$. We obtain from

989: \eqref{eq1015_10} that

990: \begin{align}\label{eq1015_11}

991: \hat{\Xi}^{\prime\prime}_n(s)=&-\frac{4}{n}\left(\frac{1}{s^3}+\frac{1}{(1-s)^3}\right)

992: +\left(\frac{n}{2}\right)^2\int_1^{\infty} t^{\frac{ns}{2}-1}(\log

993: t)^2 \left(\vartheta(t)^n-1\right)dt\\&+\left(\frac{n}{2}\right)^2

994: \int_1^{\infty}t^{\frac{n}{2}(1-s)-1}\left(\vartheta(t)^n-1\right)dt.\nonumber

995: \end{align}From here, it is easy to verify that

996: \begin{align}\label{eq1015_12}\hat{\Xi}^{\prime\prime}_{n+1}(s)

997: >\hat{\Xi}^{\prime\prime}_n(s).\end{align} Using the same argument as

998: employed in showing that for any fixed $s\in (0, n/2)$,

999: $\hat{\Xi}_n(s)>0$ when $n$ is large enough, we can use

1000: \eqref{eq1015_11} to prove that for any fixed $s\in (0,n/2)$,

1001: $\Xi_n^{\prime\prime}(s)>0$ whenever $n$ is large enough. This

1002: implies that the point $n/4$ will become a local minimum of

1003: $\Xi_n(s)$ when $n$ is large enough. In fact, using numerical

1004: computation, we find that

1005: \begin{figure}\centering \epsfxsize=.49\linewidth

1006: \epsffile{graph3.eps}  \epsfxsize=.49\linewidth

1007: \epsffile{graph4.eps} \caption{The graphs of

1008: $\hat{\Xi}_{11}(s)=\Xi_{11}\left(\frac{11s}{2}\right)$ and

1009: $\hat{\Xi}_{12}(s)=\Xi_{12}(6s)$.}

1010: \end{figure}

1011: \begin{align*}

1012: \Xi^{\prime\prime}_{10}\left(\frac{5}{2}\right)=-0.101080515709,\\

1013: \Xi^{\prime\prime}_{11}\left(\frac{11}{4}\right)=0.009568954836,

1014: \end{align*}which together with \eqref{eq1015_12}, imply that for $1\leq n\leq 10$,

1015: $s=n/4$ is a local maximum of $\Xi_n(s)$; whereas for $n\geq 11$,

1016: $s=n/4$ is a local minimum of $\Xi_n(s)$. In Figure 2, we show

1017: graphically that $s=1/2$ is a local minimum of $\hat{\Xi}_{11}(s)$

1018: and $\hat{\Xi}_{12}(s)$.

1019: 

1020:  In Table 1, we tabulate the

1021: interval $I_{n,+}, 10\leq n\leq 21$ where $\Xi_n(s)$ is positive.

1022: 

1023: \vspace{0.2cm} \noindent Table 1: The interval $I_{n,+}$ for $10\leq

1024: n\leq 21$.

1025: 

1026: \vspace{0.2cm}\noindent

1027: \begin{tabular}{|c|c||c|c|}

1028: \hline

1029: \hspace{0.5cm}$n$\hspace{0.5cm}  & $I_{n,+}$ & \hspace{0.5cm} $n$ \hspace{0.5cm} & $I_{n,+}$\\

1030: \hline

1031:  10 & \hspace{0.5cm}(1.0899, 3.9101)\hspace{0.5cm} & 11 & \hspace{0.5cm} (0.6401, 4.8599)\hspace{0.5cm} \\

1032:  12 & (0.3976,    5.6024) & 13 & \hspace{0.5cm}(0.2498, 6.2502)\hspace{0.5cm} \\

1033:  14 & (0.1562,    6.8438) & 15 & \hspace{0.5cm}(0.0964,    7.4036)\hspace{0.5cm} \\

1034:  16 & (0.0585,    7.9415) & 17 & \hspace{0.5cm}(0.0348,   8.4652)\hspace{0.5cm} \\

1035:  18 & (0.0202,    8.9798) & 19 & \hspace{0.5cm}(0.0115,    9.4885)\hspace{0.5cm} \\

1036:  20 & (0.0064,    9.9936) & 21 & \hspace{0.5cm}(0.0034,   10.4966)\hspace{0.5cm} \\

1037:  \hline

1038: \end{tabular}

1039: 

1040: \vspace{0.5cm} One notices that for $10\leq n\leq 21$, $m_n=0$,

1041: $I_{n,+}=(\gamma_{n,1}, (n/2)-\gamma_{n,1})$, $\gamma_{n,1}$ is

1042: decreasing and $I_{n,+}\subseteq I_{n+1, +}$. In fact, from  the

1043: formula \eqref{eq1015_3}, it is easy to verify that for $s\in (0,

1044: n/2)$,

1045: $$\Xi_{n+1}(s)>\Xi_n(s).$$ This shows that $I_{n,+}\subseteq I_{n+1,

1046: +}$ for all $n\geq 10$. From this table, it is also natural to

1047: conjecture that $I_{n,+}$ is an open connected interval with center

1048: at $n/4$ for all $n\geq 10$. However, to prove this would require a

1049: very detailed analysis of $\Xi_n(s)$ and its higher derivatives. We

1050: do not intend to deal further into this problem here.

1051: 

1052: We now return to the discussion about the sign of the general

1053: Xi-function $\Xi_n(s;a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ in the range $s\in (0, n/2)$.

1054: Since we have shown in Theorem \ref{th1} that for any fixed $s$, the

1055: point $a_1=\ldots=a_n$ is the minimum  of $\Xi_n(s;a_1,\ldots, a_n),

1056: (a_1,\ldots, a_n)\in(\R^n)^+$ with $\prod_{i=1}^n a_n$ fixed, now

1057: together with Proposition \ref{p5}, Proposition \ref{p6} and

1058: Proposition \ref{p2}, we obtain

1059: \begin{proposition}

1060: For $1\leq n\leq 9$, there exists a nonempty region containing the

1061: ray $a_1=\ldots=a_n$ in $(\R^n)^+$ where $\Xi_n(s;a_1,\ldots, a_n)$

1062: is negative for all $s\in (0,n/2)$.

1063: \end{proposition}

1064: 

1065: \begin{proposition}

1066: If $n\geq 10$, then for every $(a_1,\ldots, a_n)\in (\R^+)^n$, there

1067: exists a nonempty open subset of $(0, n/2)$ where $\Xi_n(s;

1068: a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ is positive and a nonempty open subset of $(0,

1069: n/2)$ where $\Xi_n(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ is negative.

1070: 

1071: 

1072: \end{proposition}This proposition implies that

1073: generalized Riemann hypothesis is not true for all the Epstein zeta

1074: function of the form $Z_{n}(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ (i.e. Epstein zeta

1075: function of positive definite diagonal quadratic forms) when $n\geq

1076: 10$.

1077: 

1078: Now consider the Epstein zeta function as a function of

1079: $(a_1,\ldots, a_n)\in(\R^+)^n$ with $s$ fixed, we can conclude with

1080: the help of Propositions \ref{p4} and \ref{p6} that

1081: \begin{proposition}\label{p7}

1082: If $1\leq n\leq 9$,  then for any fixed $s\in (0, n/2)$, there

1083: exists a nonempty open region $\Omega_{s,n}^+$ of $(a_1,\ldots,

1084: a_n)\in(\R^+)^n$ where $\Xi_{n}(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ is positive and

1085: a nonempty open region $\Omega_{s,n}^-$ of $(a_1,\ldots,

1086: a_n)\in(\R^+)^n$ where $\Xi_{n}(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ is negative.

1087: The ray $a_1=\dots=a_n$ lies inside the region $\Omega_{s,n}^-$.

1088: \end{proposition}

1089: 

1090: \begin{proposition}\label{p8}

1091: If $ n\geq 10$,  then if  $s\in I_{n,+}$ (eq. \eqref{eq1016_1}), the

1092: function $\Xi_n(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ is positive for all $

1093: (a_1,\ldots, a_n)\in (\R^+)^n$; whereas if $s\in I_{n,-}$ (eq.

1094: \eqref{eq1017_1}), there exists a nonempty open region

1095: $\Omega_{s,n}^+$ of $(a_1,\ldots, a_n)\in(\R^+)^n$ where $\Xi_{n}(s;

1096: a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ is positive and a nonempty open region

1097: $\Omega_{s,n}^-$ of $(a_1,\ldots, a_n)\in(\R^+)^n$ where $\Xi_{n}(s;

1098: a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ is negative. In the latter case, the ray

1099: $a_1=\dots=a_n$ lies inside the region $\Omega_{s,n}^-$.

1100: \end{proposition}

1101: 

1102:   Propositions \ref{p7} and \ref{p8} are important for

1103: our study of symmetry breaking of interacting fractional

1104: Klein--Gordon field in \cite{e10}. In the following section, it will

1105: be shown  that the region $\Omega_{s,n}^-$ is connected. Moreover,

1106: under the map $(a_1,\ldots, a_n)\in (\R^+)^n\mapsto (\log

1107: a_1,\ldots, \log a_n)\in \R^n$, the projection of its image to the

1108: plane $x_1+\ldots+x_n=$ constant is a convex set.

1109: \section{Convexity of the Epstein zeta function}

1110: 

1111: In this section, we   show that \begin{theorem}\label{th2}For any

1112: fixed $s$, when $\sum_{i=1}^n c_i =c$ is fixed,  the function

1113: \begin{align}\label{eq1017_2}(c_1,\ldots, c_n) \mapsto &\Xi_n\left(s; e^{c_1},\ldots,

1114: e^{c_n}\right)\nonumber\\&=-\frac{e^{\frac{c}{2}}}{s}-\frac{e^{-\frac{c}{2}}}{\frac{n}{2}-s}

1115: +e^{\frac{c}{2}}\int_1^{\infty}t^{s-1}\left(\prod_{i=1}^n

1116: \vartheta(e^{2c_i}t)-1\right)dt\\

1117: &+e^{-\frac{c}{2}}\int_1^{\infty}t^{\frac{n}{2}-s-1}\left(\prod_{i=1}^n

1118: \vartheta(e^{-2c_i}t)-1\right)dt,\nonumber\end{align}regarded as a

1119: function of any $(n-1)$ of the variables  $\{c_1,\ldots,c_n)$, is a

1120: convex function.\end{theorem} Recall that a function $f(x)$, $x\in

1121: \R^n$ is convex if and only if for any $\lambda\in (0,1)$ and any

1122: two points $x, y\in\R^n$,

1123: \begin{align*}

1124: f\left(\lambda x+(1-\lambda)y\right)\leq \lambda

1125: f(x)+(1-\lambda)f(y).

1126: \end{align*}If $f$ has continuous second partial derivatives, then

1127: $f$ is convex if and only if the Hessian of $f$,

1128: \begin{align*}

1129: H_f(x_1,\ldots, x_n)=\left(\frac{\pa^2f}{\pa x_i\pa

1130: x_j}\right)_{\substack{1\leq i\leq n\\1\leq j\leq n}},

1131: \end{align*} is a positive semi-definite matrix. One way to prove that a Hermitian matrix is positive semi-definite is

1132: to use the Sylvester criterion, which says that an $n\times n$

1133: Hermitian matrix is positive semi-definite if and only if all its

1134: leading principal minors are nonnegative. For $1\leq i\leq n$, the

1135: $i^{\text{th}}$ leading principal minor of an $n\times n$ matrix $A$

1136: is the determinant of the $i\times i$ square matrix on the upper

1137: left corner of $A$.

1138: 

1139: 

1140:  In the

1141: formula \eqref{eq1017_2},  the  dependence   on $(c_1,\ldots, c_n)$

1142: only comes from the terms $\prod_{i=1}^n\vartheta(e^{2c_i}t)$ and

1143: $\prod_{i=1}^n\vartheta(e^{-2c_i}t)$. Notice that if a function

1144: $f(x_1,\ldots, x_n)$ is convex, then under any affine change of

1145: coordinates $$x_i=\sum_{j=1}^n l_{ij} y_j+d_i, \hspace{1cm} 1\leq

1146: i\leq n,$$ the function $$\hat f(y_1,\ldots,

1147: y_n)=f\left(\sum_{j=1}^n l_{1j}y_j+d_1,\ldots,\sum_{j=1}^n

1148: l_{nj}y_j+d_n\right)$$ is also convex. Moreover, the projection of

1149: $f$ to any hyperplane $\sum_{i=1}^n b_i x_i=b$ is also convex.

1150: Therefore, if the function

1151: \begin{align*}

1152: \Theta_n(x_1,\ldots, x_n)=\prod_{i=1}^n

1153: \vartheta\left(e^{x_i}\right)=\prod_{i=1}^n \Theta_1(x_i),

1154: \hspace{1cm}(x_1,\ldots, x_n)\in\R^n

1155: \end{align*}is convex, then $\prod_{i=1}^n\vartheta(e^{2c_i}t)$ and

1156: $\prod_{i=1}^n\vartheta(e^{-2c_i}t)$, regarded as  functions of

1157: $\{c_1,\ldots,c_{n-1}\}$ (so that $c_n =c-\sum_{i=1}^{n-1}c_i$),

1158:  are convex. This will show that

1159: $\Xi_n(s; e^{c_1},\ldots, e^{c_n})$ is a convex function of

1160: $(c_1,\ldots,c_{n-1})$. Therefore to prove Theorem \ref{th2}, we

1161: only need to show that for all $n\geq 1$, the function

1162: $\Theta_n(x_1,\ldots, x_n)$ is convex.

1163:  For $n= 1$, we use the following fact:

1164: \begin{lemma}\label{l10}

1165: If $g:\R\rightarrow \R$ is a  convex function, then the function $f$

1166: defined by $$f(x)=e^{g(x)},$$is also convex.

1167: \end{lemma}\begin{proof}This is a simple consequence of the fact that

1168: the exponential function $e^x$ is a convex function, and composition

1169: of convex functions are convex.

1170: \end{proof}

1171: 

1172: Using this lemma, we can immediately conclude from Proposition

1173: \ref{p1} that

1174: \begin{lemma}\label{l3}

1175: The function $$\Theta_1(x)=\vartheta\left(e^x\right),

1176: \hspace{1cm}x\in\R$$ is convex.

1177: \end{lemma}

1178: 

1179: For $n\geq 2$, in view of the definition of $\Theta_n$, we are led

1180: to the study of a general function of the type

1181: \begin{align}\label{eq1017_11}

1182: \mathcal{F}_n(x_1, \ldots, x_n)=\prod_{i=1}^n f(x_i),

1183: \end{align}where $f:\R\rightarrow \R^+$ is a positive function of one variable.

1184: For such functions, its Hessian is given by

1185: \begin{align*}

1186: H_{\mathcal{F}_n}(x_1,\ldots,x_n) =\mathcal{F}_n(x_1,\ldots,

1187: x_n)^n\begin{pmatrix} \frac{f^{\prime\prime}(x_1)}{f(x_1)} &

1188: \frac{f'(x_1)}{f(x_1)}\frac{f'(x_2)}{f(x_2)}&\ldots &

1189: \frac{f'(x_1)}{f(x_1)}\frac{f'(x_n)}{f(x_n)}\\

1190: \frac{f'(x_2)}{f(x_2)}\frac{f'(x_1)}{f(x_1)} &

1191: \frac{f^{\prime\prime}(x_2)}{f(x_2)}&\ldots &

1192: \frac{f'(x_2)}{f(x_2)}\frac{f'(x_n)}{f(x_n)}\\

1193: \vdots &\vdots & & \vdots\\

1194: \frac{f'(x_n)}{f(x_n)}\frac{f'(x_1)}{f(x_1)}&\frac{f'(x_n)}{f(x_n)}\frac{f'(x_2)}{f(x_2)}

1195: &\ldots &\frac{f^{\prime\prime}(x_n)}{f(x_n)}\end{pmatrix}.

1196: \end{align*}By the Sylvester criterion, to show that $\mathcal{F}_n$

1197: is convex, it is sufficient to show that all the leading principal

1198: minors of

1199: \begin{align}\label{eq1017_12}

1200: H_n(x_1,\ldots, x_n)=\begin{pmatrix}

1201: \frac{f^{\prime\prime}(x_1)}{f(x_1)} &

1202: \frac{f'(x_1)}{f(x_1)}\frac{f'(x_2)}{f(x_2)}&\ldots &

1203: \frac{f'(x_1)}{f(x_1)}\frac{f'(x_n)}{f(x_n)}\\

1204: \frac{f'(x_2)}{f(x_2)}\frac{f'(x_1)}{f(x_1)} &

1205: \frac{f^{\prime\prime}(x_2)}{f(x_2)}&\ldots &

1206: \frac{f'(x_2)}{f(x_2)}\frac{f'(x_n)}{f(x_n)}\\

1207: \vdots &\vdots & & \vdots\\

1208: \frac{f'(x_n)}{f(x_n)}\frac{f'(x_1)}{f(x_1)}&\frac{f'(x_n)}{f(x_n)}\frac{f'(x_2)}{f(x_2)}

1209: &\ldots &\frac{f^{\prime\prime}(x_n)}{f(x_n)}\end{pmatrix}

1210: \end{align}are nonnegative. Notice that the $i^{\text{th}}$ leading

1211: principal minor of $H_n(x_1,\ldots,x_n)$ is the determinant of

1212: $H_i(x_1,\ldots, x_i)$. Therefore, one only have to show that $\det

1213: H_n\geq 0$ for all $n\geq 1$. For $f(x)=\vartheta(e^x)$, the $n=1$

1214: case is already proved in Lemma \ref{l3}. For $n\geq 2$, to further

1215: simplify our problem, notice that for fixed $(x_1,\ldots,x_n)\in

1216: \R^n$, the matrix $H_n$ has the form

1217: \begin{align*}

1218: J_n =\begin{pmatrix} z_1& w_1 w_2 & \ldots & w_1 w_n\\

1219: w_2w_1 & z_2 &\ldots & w_2w_n\\

1220: \vdots &\vdots & & \vdots\\

1221: w_n w_1 & w_n w_2 & \ldots & z_n\end{pmatrix}

1222: \end{align*}for some $2n$ real numbers $z_1,\ldots, z_n$ and

1223: $w_1,\ldots, w_n$. When $n=2$, the determinant of $J_2$ is

1224: \begin{align}\label{eq1017_6}

1225: \det J_2= z_1 z_2- w_1^2

1226: w_2^2=(z_1-w_1^2)(z_2-w_2^2)+w_1^2(z_1-w_1^2)+w_2^2(z_2-w_2^2).

1227: \end{align}The reason for expressing the determinant in this form is

1228: inspired by the fact that for

1229: $z_i=\frac{f^{\prime\prime}(x_i)}{f(x_i)}$,

1230: $w_i=\frac{f'(x_i)}{f(x_i)}$,

1231: \begin{align}\label{eq1017_13}z_i-w_i^2=\frac{d^2}{dx_i^2}\log f(x_i).\end{align}Eq.

1232: \eqref{eq1017_6} implies that if $z_i-w_i^2\geq 0$, then $\det

1233: J_2\geq 0$. This gives

1234: \begin{lemma}\label{l4}

1235: Let $f:\R\rightarrow \R^+$ be a twice continuously differentiable

1236: positive function. If  $\log f(x)$ is a convex function, then the

1237: function $\mathcal{F}_2(x_1, x_2)=f(x_1)f(x_2)$ is convex.

1238: \end{lemma}

1239: \begin{proof}

1240: Recall that $\mathcal{F}_2(x_1, x_2)$ is convex if and only if

1241: $$\det H_1(x_1)=\frac{f^{\prime\prime}(x_1)}{f(x_1)}\geq 0$$ and

1242: $$\det H_2(x_1, x_2)=\det

1243: J_2\left[z_1=\frac{f^{\prime\prime}(x_1)}{f(x_1)},

1244: z_2=\frac{f^{\prime\prime}(x_2)}{f(x_2)}; w_1=\frac{f^{\prime

1245: }(x_1)}{f(x_1)}, w_2=\frac{f^{\prime }(x_2)}{f(x_2)}\right]\geq 0.$$

1246: As discussed above, if $\log f(x)$ is convex, then $\det H_2(x_1,

1247: x_2)\geq 0$. On the other hand, Lemma \ref{l10} implies that $f(x)$

1248: is also convex. Therefore, $\det H_1(x_1)\geq 0$. This completes the

1249: proof.

1250: \end{proof}

1251: 

1252: For the case under consideration, $f(x)=\vartheta(e^x)$, and it is

1253: shown in Proposition

1254:  \ref{p1} that  $\log \vartheta(e^x)$ is a

1255:  convex function. Therefore, Lemma \ref{l4} implies that

1256:  \begin{lemma}\label{l5}

1257: The function $$\Theta_2(x_1,

1258: x_2)=\vartheta(e^{x_1})\vartheta(e^{x_2}), \hspace{1cm}(x_1, x_2)\in

1259: \R^2$$ is convex.

1260:  \end{lemma}

1261: 

1262: Returning to the general case. First we claim the following, which

1263: is a generalization of \eqref{eq1017_6}.

1264: \begin{proposition}\label{p10}

1265: For $n\geq 2$,

1266: \begin{align}\label{eq1017_14}

1267: \det J_n =\det \begin{pmatrix} z_1& w_1 w_2 & \ldots & w_1 w_n\\

1268: w_2w_1 & z_2 &\ldots & w_2w_n\\

1269: \vdots &\vdots & & \vdots\\

1270: w_n w_1 & w_n w_2 & \ldots & z_n\end{pmatrix}=\prod_{i=1}^n

1271: (z_i-w_i^2)+\sum_{i=1}^n w_i^2\left[\prod_{j\neq

1272: i}\left(z_j-w_j^2\right)\right].

1273: \end{align}Therefore, if $z_i\geq w_i^2$ for all $1\leq i\leq n$, then $\det

1274: J_n\geq 0$.

1275: \end{proposition}We would like to discuss the consequence of this

1276: proposition first, and give the proof later. From the above

1277: discussion, the function $\mathcal{F}_n$ of the form

1278: \eqref{eq1017_11} is convex if and only if all the determinants of

1279: $H_i$ (eq. \eqref{eq1017_12}), $1\leq i\leq n$ are nonnegative. Now

1280: $H_n$ is a matrix of the form $J_n$, with $z_i -w_i^2$ given by

1281: \eqref{eq1017_13}. Therefore, we conclude from Proposition \ref{p10}

1282: that

1283: \begin{proposition}

1284: Let $f:\R\rightarrow \R^+$ be a twice continuously differentiable

1285: positive function. If  $\log f(x)$ is a  convex function, then the

1286: function $$\mathcal{F}_n(x_1,\ldots, x_n)=\prod_{i=1}^nf(x_i)$$ is

1287: convex.

1288: \end{proposition}As in Lemma \ref{l5},   this

1289: proposition implies that

1290: \begin{proposition}

1291: For any $n\geq 1$, the function $$\Theta_n(x_1,\ldots,

1292: x_n)=\prod_{i=1}^n \vartheta(e^{x_i}), \hspace{1cm} (x_1,\ldots,

1293: x_n)\in \R^n,$$ is a convex function.

1294: \end{proposition}As discussed in the beginning of this section, this

1295: concludes the proof of Theorem \ref{th2}. Therefore, what is left is

1296: the proof of Proposition \ref{p10}.

1297: 

1298: \begin{proof}By factoring out $w_i$ from row $i$ and column $i$, we have

1299: \begin{align*}

1300: \det J_n =\left[\prod_{i=1}^n w_i^2\right]^2

1301: \mathcal{J}_n\left(\frac{z_1}{w_1^2},\frac{z_2}{w_2^2},\ldots,

1302: \frac{z_n}{w_n^2}\right),

1303: \end{align*}where \begin{align*}

1304: \mathcal{J}_n(\alpha_1,\ldots, \alpha_n)=\det \begin{pmatrix}\alpha_1 & 1  &1 &\ldots & 1\\

1305: 1 &\alpha_2 & 1 &\ldots & 1\\

1306: 1 & 1 & \alpha_3 & \ldots & 1\\

1307: \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & &\vdots\\

1308: 1 & 1 & 1 & \ldots & \alpha_n\end{pmatrix}.

1309: \end{align*}By elementary row operation, we find that

1310: \begin{align*}

1311: \mathcal{J}_n(\alpha_1,\ldots, \alpha_n)=&\det \begin{pmatrix}\alpha_1 & 1  &1 &\ldots & 1\\

1312: 1 &\alpha_2 & 1 &\ldots & 1\\

1313: 1 & 1 & \alpha_3 & \ldots & 1\\

1314: \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & &\vdots\\

1315: 1 & 1 & 1 & \ldots & \alpha_n\end{pmatrix}\\=&\det \begin{pmatrix}\alpha_1-1 & 1-\alpha_2  &0 &\ldots & 0\\

1316: 0 &\alpha_2-1 & 1-\alpha_3 &\ldots & 0\\

1317: 0 & 0 & \alpha_3-1 & \ldots & 0\\

1318: \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & &\vdots\\

1319: 1 & 1 & 1 & \ldots & \alpha_n\end{pmatrix}\\

1320: =&\left(\alpha_1-1\right)\mathcal{J}_{n-1}\left(\alpha_2,\ldots,

1321: \alpha_n\right)+(-1)^{n-1}\prod_{i=2}^n(1-\alpha_i).

1322: \end{align*}It then follows by induction that

1323: \begin{align*}

1324: \mathcal{J}_n(\alpha_1,\ldots, \alpha_n)=\prod_{i=1}^n (\alpha_i-1)

1325: +\sum_{i=1}^n \prod_{j\neq i}(\alpha_j-1).

1326: \end{align*}This proves the proposition.

1327: \end{proof}

1328: 

1329: Next we discuss the consequences of Theorem \ref{th2}. Let $j$ be a

1330: positive integer less than or equal to $n-1$, $A$  an $n\times j$

1331: matrix such that the sum of every column vanishes, i.e.,

1332: \begin{align}\label{eq1018_1}\sum_{i=1}^n A_{ij}=0, \end{align}and let $v$ be a vector in $\R^n$.

1333: Define a $j$-variable function ${\Xi}_{n,A,v}(s; b_1,\ldots, b_j)$

1334: by

1335: \begin{align*}

1336: {\Xi}_{n,A,v}(s; b_1,\ldots, b_j) = \Xi_n\left(s;

1337: \exp\left[v_1+\sum_{l=1}^j A_{1l}b_l \right],\ldots,

1338: \exp\left[v_n+\sum_{l=1}^j A_{nl}b_l \right]\right).

1339: \end{align*}Notice that the condition \eqref{eq1018_1} implies

1340: \begin{align*}

1341: \prod_{i=1}^n \exp\left[v_i+\sum_{l=1}^j A_{il}b_l

1342: \right]=\exp\left[\sum_{i=1}^n v_i\right]=\text{constant}.

1343: \end{align*}Since affine change of coordinates does not affect the

1344: convexity of a function, we conclude from Theorem \ref{th2} that

1345: $\Xi_{n,A,v}(s;b_1,\ldots, b_j)$ is a convex function of

1346: $(b_1,\ldots, b_j)$. As an example, if $v=0$ and $A$ is the $n\times

1347: (n-1)$ matrix

1348: \begin{align}\label{eq1018_3}

1349: A=\begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0   &\ldots & 0\\

1350: 0 & 1  & \ldots & 0\\

1351: \vdots & \vdots   & &\vdots\\

1352: 0 & 0   & \ldots & 1\\

1353: -1 & -1   & \ldots & -1\end{pmatrix},

1354: \end{align}then $\Xi_{n,A,v}(b_1,\ldots, b_n)$ is just the function defined in

1355: \eqref{eq1017_2} with $b_i=c_i$ for $1\leq i\leq n-1$ and

1356: $\sum_{i=1}^n c_n=0$.

1357: 

1358: By the convexity of $\Xi_{n,A,v}\left(s; b_1,\ldots, b_j\right)$, we

1359: can conclude that the region $\Omega_{s, A, v}^-$ of $(b_1,\ldots,

1360: b_j)\in \R^j$ where $\Xi_{n,A,v}\left(s; b_1,\ldots, b_j\right)<0$

1361: is a convex, and therefore connected region. Using the fact that at

1362: fixed $\prod_{i=1}^na_i$, the minimum of $\Xi_n(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)$

1363: appears at $a_1=\ldots=a_n$, one can even conclude that if

1364: $\Omega_{s, A, v}^-$ is nonempty and if $b=\hat{b}$ is a solution of

1365: the system

1366: \begin{align}\label{eq1018_4}

1367: Ab+v=\left[\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n

1368: v_i\right]\begin{pmatrix}1\\1\\\vdots\\1\end{pmatrix},

1369: \end{align} then $\hat{b}\in

1370: \Omega_{s,A,v}^-$. When $A$ is given by \eqref{eq1018_3} and $v=0$,

1371: the system \eqref{eq1018_4} has a unique solution $b=0$. Therefore,

1372: the region of $(c_1,\ldots, c_{n-1})\in \R^n$ where the function

1373: $\Xi_n\left(s; e^{c_1}, \ldots, e^{c_{n-1}},

1374: e^{c-c_1-\ldots-c_{n-1}}\right)$ \eqref{eq1017_2} is negative is a

1375: convex connected region containing the origin

1376: $c_1=\ldots=c_{n-1}=0$.

1377: 

1378: 

1379: As a second example, suppose  the variables $(a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ in

1380: $\Xi_n(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ are such that $a_1:\ldots : a_n

1381: =1:k_2:\ldots:k_n$ and $\prod_{i=1}^n a_i=1$. A simple computation

1382: shows that under these conditions, $a_1,\ldots, a_n$ can be

1383: expressed as functions of $(k_2, \ldots, k_n)$:

1384: \begin{align*}

1385: a_1=\frac{1}{ \prod_{i=2}^n k_i^{\frac{1}{n}}},

1386: \hspace{0.5cm}a_2=\frac{k_2^{\frac{n-1}{n}}}{\prod_{i=3}^n

1387: k_i^{\frac{1}{n}}},\hspace{0.5cm}\ldots,\hspace{0.5cm}

1388: a_n=\frac{k_n^{\frac{n-1}{n}}}{\prod_{i=2}^{n-1}k_i^{\frac{1}{n}}}.

1389: \end{align*}Therefore the function $\Xi_n(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ can

1390: be regarded as a function of $\log k_i$, $2\leq i\leq n$ with

1391: corresponding $A$ and $v$ given by

1392: $$A=\begin{pmatrix}-\frac{1}{n} & -\frac{1}{n} & \ldots & -\frac{1}{n}\\

1393: \frac{n-1}{n} & -\frac{1}{n} & \ldots & -\frac{1}{n}\\

1394: \vdots & \vdots & & \vdots\\

1395: -\frac{1}{n} & -\frac{1}{n} & \ldots &\frac{n-1}{n}

1396: \end{pmatrix}$$ and $v=0$. Consequently, the region $\Omega_{s,n}^-$

1397: where $\Xi_n(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)<0$, plotted with respect to the

1398: variables $\log k_2,\ldots, \log k_n$ is a convex and connected

1399: region containing the point $\log k_2=\ldots=\log k_n=0$. Reducing

1400: the number of variables by setting some of the variables $k_i$ to be

1401: equal to a constant or setting $k_i=k_j$ for some pairs of $i\neq j$

1402: are tantamount to restricting the variables $(\log k_2, \ldots, \log

1403: k_n)$ to the intersections of hyperplanes in $\R^{n-1}$. Therefore

1404: plotting the region $\Omega_{s,n}^-$ with respect to the   remaining

1405: $\log k_i$ variables, the new region is still convex and connected.

1406: In \cite{e10}, we have plotted the regions where $\Xi_3(s; a_1, a_2,

1407: a_3)<0$ with respect to the variables $\log k_2$ and $\log k_3$, and

1408: the regions where $\Xi_4(s; a_1,a_2,a_3, a_4)<0$ with respect to the

1409: variables $\log k_2, \log k_3$, with $k_4=1$ and $k_4=3$, for some

1410: values of $s$. The graphs show that these regions are indeed convex

1411: and connected. As a matter of fact, when the regions

1412: $\Omega_{s,n}^-$ are plotted using computer softwares, we can only

1413: determine the regions  in finite domains of the $\log k$ variables.

1414: Our convexity and connectivity results guarantee that there does not

1415: exists region of $\Omega_{s,n}^-$ outside the finite domain we

1416: consider.

1417: 

1418: Finally, notice that the map $(a_1,\ldots, a_n)\in (\R^+)^n \mapsto

1419: (\log a_1,\ldots, \log a_n)\in \R^n$ is continuous. On the other

1420: hand, we have shown that the intersection of the region

1421: $\Omega_{s,n}^-$ where $\Xi_{n}(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)<0$ with any

1422: hypersurface in $(\R^+)^n$ of the form $\prod_{i=1}^n a_i=a$ a

1423: constant, contains the point $a_1=\ldots=a_n=a^{\frac{1}{n}}$. These

1424: allow one to conclude that the region $\Omega^-_{s,n}$, as a region

1425: of $(a_1,\ldots, a_n)\in (\R^+)^n$, is a connected region that

1426: contains the ray $a_1=\ldots=a_n$.

1427: 

1428: \section{Concluding remarks}

1429: 

1430: This paper is motivated by  our recent work \cite{e10}, in which we

1431: need to determine the conditions for which symmetry breaking occurs

1432: in the $\lambda\varphi^4$--interacting fractional Klein--Gordon

1433: field theory on a toroidal spacetime $T^n\times \R^{N}$. The results

1434: obtained in this work are used in \cite{e10}. Since the Epstein zeta

1435: function $Z_n(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ always appears when one studies

1436: field theories on toroidal manifolds or rectangular cavities, the

1437: results presented here may have  potential applications for other

1438: works along these directions. For physics applications, one is

1439: usually interested in simple toroidal manifolds of the form

1440: $T^n\times \R^N$, which can be considered as  quotients of $\R^n$ by

1441: rectangular lattices. This explains why we consider Epstein zeta

1442: function of the form $Z_n(s; a_1,\ldots, a_n), a\in (\R^+)^n$

1443: instead of the general Epstein zeta function $Z_n(A;s)$ with $A$ any

1444: positive definitive symmetric matrix. An advantage of this

1445: simplification is that we can determine the minimum of $Z_{n}(s;

1446: a_1,\ldots, a_n), a\in (\R^+)^n, \prod_{i=1}^n a_i=1$ for all

1447: $s\in\R\setminus \{0,n/2\}$ and all $n\in \mathbb{N}$.  In contrast,

1448: for general Epstein zeta function $Z_n(A;s)$ with $\det A=1$, only

1449: some local minima have been determined for $n=2,3,4,5,6,7,8,24$ with

1450: $s$ in some range of $\R$ [15--38]. In fact, for all these known

1451: cases, the minimum of $Z_n(s; a_1, \ldots, a_n), a\in (\R^+)^n,

1452: \prod_{i=1}^n a_i=1$ is no longer a local minimum in the larger

1453: domain where $A\in \left\{\text{positive definite

1454: symmetric}\;n\times n\;\text{matrices}\right\}$. In the attempt to

1455: search for the correct spacetime model, it might turn out that the

1456: general toroidal manifold $\R^n/L$, where $L$ is any lattice in

1457: $\R^n$, will be of importance to physics. In that case, we need to

1458: extend the work of this paper to general Epstein zeta function

1459: $Z_n(A;s)$. It is hoped that the methods and results in this paper

1460: will be useful for the study of this general problem.

1461: 

1462: Our result about the convexity of the Epstein zeta function $Z_n(s;

1463: a_1,\ldots, a_n)$, as a function of $\log a_1,\ldots, \log a_n$ with

1464: $\log a_1+\ldots+\log a_n$ fixed,   seems to be new. This result is

1465: important for determining the regions where $Z_n(s; a_1,\ldots,

1466: a_n)$ is positive or negative, as discussed at the end of section 4.

1467: As a matter of fact, we have obtained a more general result

1468: regarding the convexity of functions $\mathcal{F}(x_1,\ldots, x_n)$

1469: of the form $\mathcal{F}(x_1,\ldots, x_n)=\prod_{i=1}^n f(x_i)$,

1470: where $f(x)$ is a positive   function that has continuous second

1471: derivative. This result may have applications in other areas of

1472: mathematics.

1473: 

1474: 

1475:  \vspace{1cm} \noindent \textbf{Acknowledgement}\;

1476: The authors would like to thank Malaysian Academy of Sciences,

1477: Ministry of Science, Technology  and Innovation for funding this

1478: project under the Scientific Advancement Fund Allocation (SAGA) Ref.

1479: No P96c.

1480: 

1481: \begin{thebibliography}{10}

1482: \bibitem{Ep1} P. Epstein, \emph{Zur Theorie allgemeiner Zetafunktionen},  Math. Ann. \textbf{56},  615--644 (1903).

1483: 

1484: \bibitem{Ep2}P. Epstein, \emph{Zur Theorie allgemeiner Zetafunktionen II}, Math. Ann. \textbf{65},

1485: 205--216 (1907).

1486: 

1487: \bibitem{e4}

1488: C.~L. Siegel, \emph{Contributions to the theory of the {D}irichlet

1489:   {$L$}-series and the {E}pstein zeta-functions}, Ann. of Math. (2) \textbf{44}, 143--172 (1943).

1490: 

1491: 

1492: 

1493: \bibitem{e1}

1494: M.~Koecher, \emph{\"Uber Dirichlet-Reihen mit Funktionalgleichung},

1495:   J. Reine Angew. Math. \textbf{192}, 1–-23 (1953).

1496: 

1497:   \bibitem{e5}

1498: C.~L. Siegel, \emph{A generalization of the {E}pstein zeta

1499: function}, J. Indian

1500:   Math. Soc. (N.S.) \textbf{20}, 1--10 (1956).

1501: 

1502: \bibitem{e2}

1503: A.~Selberg, \emph{A new type of zeta function connected with

1504: quadratic forms}, Report of the Inst. in Theory of Numbers, U. of

1505: Colorado, Boulder, Colo., 207--210 (1959).

1506: 

1507: 

1508: 

1509:   \bibitem{e6}

1510: A. Terras, \emph{A generalization of {E}pstein's zeta function},

1511: Nagoya

1512:   Math. J. \textbf{42}, 173--188 (1971).

1513: 

1514:   \bibitem{e3}

1515: S.~Chowla, \emph{On an unsuspected real zero of {E}pstein's zeta

1516: function},

1517:   Proc. Nat. Inst. Sci. India \textbf{13}, no.~4, 1  (1947).

1518: 

1519:   \bibitem{E1}%5

1520: E.~Elizalde, S.~D. Odintsov, A.~Romeo, A.~A. Bytsenko, and

1521: S.~Zerbini,

1522:   \emph{Zeta regularization techniques with applications}, (World Scientific

1523:   Publishing Co. Inc., River Edge, NJ, 1994).

1524: 

1525: \bibitem{ET}

1526: Emilio Elizalde, \emph{Ten physical applications of spectral zeta

1527: functions},

1528:   (Springer-Verlag,

1529:   Berlin, 1995).

1530: 

1531: 

1532: \bibitem{K}%7

1533: K.~Kirsten, \emph{Spectral functions in mathematics and physics},

1534: (Chapman \&

1535:   Hall/ CRC, Boca Raton, FL, 2002).

1536: 

1537: 

1538: \bibitem{AW}%3

1539: Jan Ambj{\o}rn and S.~Wolfram, \emph{Properties of the vacuum. {I}.

1540:   {M}echanical and thermodynamic}, Ann. Physics \textbf{147}, 1--32 (1983).

1541: 

1542: \bibitem{c41} D.~J. Toms, \emph{Symmetry breaking and mass generation by space-time

1543: topology}, Phys. Rev. D \textbf{21}, 2805--2817 (1980).

1544: 

1545: \bibitem{c42} G. Denardo and E. Spallucci, \emph{Dynamical mass generation in $S^1\times R^3$},

1546: Nucl. Phys. B \textbf{169}, 514--526 (1980).

1547: 

1548: 

1549: \bibitem{c43} A. Actor, \emph{Topological generation of gauge field mass by toroidal

1550: spacetime}, Class. Quantum Grav. \textbf{7}, 663--683 (1980).

1551: 

1552: \bibitem{c44} K. Kirsten, \emph{Topological gauge field mass generation by toroidal

1553: spacetime}, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. \textbf{26}, 2421--2435 (1993).

1554: 

1555:   \bibitem{EK1} E. Elizalde and K. Kirsten, \emph{Topological symmetry breaking in

1556: self-interacting theories on toroidal space-time}, J. Math. Phys.

1557: \textbf{35}, 1260--1273 (1994).

1558: 

1559: \bibitem{e10} S.~C. Lim and L.~P. Teo, \emph{Topological symmetry

1560: breaking of self--interacting fractional Klein--Gordon field on

1561: toroidal spacetime}, submitted, can be downloaded from

1562: http://pesona.mmu.edu.my/~lpteo.

1563: 

1564: 

1565: 

1566: \bibitem{f9}

1567: R.~A. Rankin, \emph{A minimum problem for the {E}pstein

1568: zeta-function}, Proc.

1569:   Glasgow Math. Assoc. \textbf{1}, 149--158 (1953).

1570: 

1571: \bibitem{f23}

1572: J.~W.~S. Cassels, \emph{On a problem of Rankin about Epstein zeta

1573: function}, Proc. Glasg. Math. Assoc. \textbf{4}, 73--80 (1959);

1574: \textbf{6}, 116 (1963).

1575: 

1576:   \bibitem{f3}

1577: V.~Ennola, \emph{On a problem about the {E}pstein zeta-function},

1578: Proc.

1579:   Cambridge Philos. Soc. \textbf{60}, 855--875 (1964).

1580: 

1581: \bibitem{f24}

1582: P.~H. Diananda, \emph{Notes on two lemmas concerning the Epstein

1583: zeta function}, Proc. Glasg. Math. Assoc. \textbf{6}, 202--204

1584: (1964).

1585: 

1586:   \bibitem{f10}

1587: S.~S. Ry{\v{s}}kov, \emph{On the question of the final {$\zeta

1588: $}-optimality of

1589:   lattices that yield the densest packing of {$n$}-dimensional balls}, Sibirsk.

1590:   Mat. \v Z. \textbf{14}, 1065--1075 (1973).

1591: 

1592:   \bibitem{f19}

1593: S.~{\v{S}}. {\v{S}}u{\v{s}}baev, \emph{An estimate of the origin of

1594: the ray of

1595:   extremality of the principal perfect form in four variables}, Dokl. Akad.

1596:   Nauk UzSSR, no.~9, 15--16 (1976).

1597: 

1598: \bibitem{f20}

1599: S.~{\v{S}}. {\v{S}}u{\v{s}}baev, \emph{An estimate of the origin of

1600: the ray of extremality of the

1601:   principal perfect form in five variables}, Voprosy Vy\v cisl. i Prikl. Mat.

1602:   (Tashkent), no. 46, 3--8 (1977).

1603: 

1604: \bibitem{f21}

1605: S.~{\v{S}}. {\v{S}}u{\v{s}}baev, \emph{The {R}ankin-{S}obolev

1606: problem on extrema of {E}pstein's zeta

1607:   function. {T}he origin of the ray of extremality of the principal perfect

1608:   form}, Izv. Akad. Nauk UzSSR Ser. Fiz.-Mat. Nauk, no.~1, 33--39 (1978).

1609: 

1610: 

1611: 

1612: 

1613: \bibitem{f2}

1614: K.~M. {\`E}ndibaev, \emph{The extremal of {E}pstein's zeta function

1615: from four

1616:   variables}, Voprosy Vychisl. i Prikl. Mat. (Tashkent), no.~51,

1617:   178--190 (1978).

1618: 

1619:   \bibitem{f22}

1620: A.~Terras, \emph{The minima of quadratic forms and the behavior of

1621: {E}pstein

1622:   and {D}edekind zeta functions}, J. Number Theory \textbf{12}, no.~2,

1623:   258--272 (1980).

1624: 

1625: \bibitem{f1}

1626: K.~M. {\`E}ndibaev, \emph{An extremal problem for the

1627: four-dimensional {E}pstein {$\zeta

1628:   $}-function}, Dokl. Akad. Nauk UzSSR, no.~4, 18--21 (1978).

1629: 

1630: 

1631: 

1632: \bibitem{f4}

1633: K.~L. Fields, \emph{Locally minimal {E}pstein zeta functions},

1634: Mathematika

1635:   \textbf{27}, no.~1, 17--24 (1980).

1636: 

1637: \bibitem{f6}

1638: Z.~D. Lomakina and S.~S. Ryshkov, \emph{One-dimensional and

1639: two-dimensional

1640:   faces of the polyhedron {$\mu(5)$}}, Zap. Nauchn. Sem. Leningrad. Otdel. Mat.

1641:   Inst. Steklov. (LOMI) \textbf{151}, no.~9,

1642:   95--103 (1986).

1643: 

1644:   \bibitem{f12}

1645: S.~Sh. Shushbaev, \emph{On the {R}ankin-{S}obolev problem on extrema

1646: of

1647:   {E}pstein zeta-functions and on a transcendental equation}, Voprosy Vychisl.

1648:   i Prikl. Mat. (Tashkent), no.~82, 108--113 (1987).

1649: 

1650: \bibitem{f13}

1651: S.~Sh. Shushbaev, \emph{Local minima of the {E}pstein zeta

1652: function}, Mat. Zametki

1653:   \textbf{45}, no.~1, 123--131 (1989).

1654: 

1655: \bibitem{f15}

1656: S.~Sh. Shushbaev, \emph{On the {R}ankin-{S}obolev problem on extrema

1657: of the {E}pstein

1658:   zeta-function. {A}n estimate for the origin of a ray of extremality of the

1659:   second perfect {V}orono\u\i\ form}, Sibirsk. Mat. Zh. \textbf{31},

1660:   no.~5, 157--163 (1990).

1661: 

1662: \bibitem{f14}

1663: S.~Sh. Shushbaev, \emph{Two local minima of the six-dimensional

1664: {E}pstein

1665:   zeta-function}, Izv. Vyssh. Uchebn. Zaved. Mat., no.~5, 78--83 (1990).

1666: 

1667: \bibitem{f16}

1668: S.~Sh. Shushbaev, \emph{Rays of extremality: eventually extremal

1669: forms in seven

1670:   variables}, Sibirsk. Mat. Zh. \textbf{35}, no.~6, 1397--1400 (1994).

1671: 

1672: \bibitem{f7}

1673: E.~V. Orlovskaya, \emph{The minimum for a theta function of three

1674: variables and

1675:   the solution of the {R}ankin-{S}obolev problem in three-dimensional space},

1676:   Vestnik S.-Peterburg. Univ. Mat. Mekh. Astronom. \textbf{149}, no. 3, 23--27

1677:    (1994).

1678: 

1679:    \bibitem{f8}

1680: E.~V. Orlovskaya, \emph{The minimum for the theta-function of three

1681: variables and the

1682:   solution of the {R}ankin-{S}obolev problem in a three-dimensional space},

1683:   Zap. Nauchn. Sem. S.-Peterburg. Otdel. Mat. Inst. Steklov. (POMI)

1684:   \textbf{211}, no. 3, 150--157 (1994).

1685: 

1686: \bibitem{f5}

1687: W.~Jenkner, \emph{Sur les fonctions z\^eta attach\'ees aux classes

1688: de rayon},

1689:   J. Th\'eor. Nombres Bordeaux \textbf{7}, no.~1, 1--14 (1995).

1690: 

1691: 

1692: 

1693: \bibitem{f17}

1694: S.~Sh. Shushbaev and G.~A. Kalybaeva, \emph{On a perfect form that

1695: is not a

1696:   final-extremal form}, Uzbek. Mat. Zh., no.~2, 80--86 (2002).

1697: 

1698: \bibitem{f18}

1699: J.~Steuding, \emph{On the zero-distribution of {E}pstein

1700: zeta-functions}, Math.

1701:   Ann. \textbf{333}, no.~3, 689--697 (2005).

1702: 

1703: 

1704: 

1705: 

1706: 

1707: 

1708: 

1709: \bibitem{f11}

1710: P.~Sarnak and A.~Str{\"o}mbergsson, \emph{Minima of {E}pstein's zeta

1711: function

1712:   and heights of flat tori}, Invent. Math. \textbf{165}, no.~1,

1713:   115--151 (2006).

1714: 

1715: \bibitem{d19}

1716: S.~Chowla and A.~Selberg, \emph{On {E}pstein's zeta function. {I}},

1717: Proc. Nat.

1718:   Acad. Sci. U. S. A. \textbf{35}, 371--374 (1949).

1719: 

1720: \bibitem{d20}

1721: A. Selberg and S.~Chowla, \emph{On {E}pstein's zeta-function}, J.

1722: Reine

1723:   Angew. Math. \textbf{227}, 86--110 (1967).

1724: 

1725: \bibitem{g1}

1726: I.~S. Gradshteyn and I.~M. Ryzhik, \emph{Table of integrals, series,

1727: and

1728:   products}, (Academic Press Inc., San Diego, CA, 2000).

1729: 

1730: \bibitem{g2}

1731: A. Fujii, \emph{A note on the values of the Epstein zeta functions

1732: at the critical points},  Comment. Math. Univ. St. Pauli

1733: \textbf{49}, no.~2, 195--225 (2000).

1734: 

1735: 

1736: \end{thebibliography}

1737: 

1738: \end{document}

1739: