Hacker Timesnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

That’s what I secretly wished. If it where infinite then everything is explained.

But the Wikipedia article “said” that it is 0 (because 1^0+2^0+3^0+...=1+1+1, and 0 is even). But the [dead?!] article submitted by ColinWright from Tao’s blog says it’s -1/2. (I prefer not to disagree with Tao, just fixed Wikipedia.)

The problem is more deep. I should read the complete version of Tao’s article.



> The problem is more deep.

You want to focus on the idea of analytic continuation. That's where the magic happens.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: