Talk:On the Number of Primes Less Than a Given Magnitude

Influenced "thousands" of researchers

Michael, no "thousands" is not an exaggeration. Revolver 07:52, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Language of article title

Any objections to moving the article to its original german name Über die Anzahl der Primzahlen unter einer gegebenen Grösse ? The paper was published in german so I think the naming of the article should reflect this. MathMartin 20:41, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Well, the famous play by Sartre is at No Exit, with a redirect from the original French title Huis clos. Standard practice? Dbenbenn 21:46, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I do not know what the standard practise is. My main reason for using the original name for article title (and using the english name(s) for redirect) is to have it listed under its original name in the associated categories (for example Category:Mathematics books). The original name is unique, whereas the translated name is not. MathMartin 13:23, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Someone who sees the German title in a category listing won't have any idea what the article is about. It seems to me that English is more helpful in the category listing. What's another article that collides with the English title? Dbenbenn 15:17, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

There is already french and latin in Category:Mathematics books. I meant unique in the sense that there are several different translations of the title into English. So someone who is scanning the Category listing for this paper might not know for what title to look for.

I just did a quick google scan comparing On the Number of Primes Less Than a Given Magnitude (427) hits against Über die Anzahl der Primzahlen unter einer gegebenen Grösse (313) hits. As far as I know the wikipedia policy is to use the more common name, so the english name is the better choice. I will not change the title of the article. MathMartin 16:51, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Need German article

We need a German version too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.215.45.173 (talk) 02:04, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

help in understanding

what does the +inf to +inf integral mean? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Albertobosia (talk • contribs) 18:31, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering about this as well, and so asked about it over on the Wikipedia Mathematics Reference Desk at Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Mathematics/2012 August 22#Riemann's integral from infinity to infinity. It turns out the integral is a contour integral. —SeekingAnswers (reply) 21:42, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it means -infinity to infinity on the bounds of integration. Capital I? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:449:8200:A430:D133:A463:5DD3:3A24 (talk) 13:43, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

8 pages or 10 pages?

See the original paper in [1] - pages 671-680, 10 pages if I am counting correctly. Thanks, אבינעם (talk) 07:38, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your source does show it to be 10 pages, and so I've gone ahead and fixed the page count within this Wikipedia article. —Lowellian (reply) 02:40, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction of notation

The article says, at this moment:

"The paper was so influential that the notation s = σ + it is used to denote a complex number while discussing the zeta function (see below) instead of the usual z = x + iy. (The notation s = σ + it was begun by Edmund Landau in 1903.)"

Since this paper was published in 1859, and it used the notation s = σ + it, how can this same notation have started more than fourty years later in 1903 with Landau? I don't think this correct. Unfortunately, I don't know enough about the history of the complex notation to repair it.--87.209.32.98 (talk) 17:23, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Riemann just uses s=1/2+it on the critical line, not σ+iτ. Although this doesn't really settle your objection entirely, and we should still seek a source for the statement in the article, or remove it altogether. I think the correct statement is that Riemann introduced the letter "s" that is traditional with the zeta function, and Landau standardized the notation for the real and imaginary parts of s. Sławomir Biały (talk) 17:58, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Slowomir; I cannot parse this sentence at all, despite being a professional mathematician. Since Slawomir's comment is 6 months old by now and the original author has not fixed the issue, I am removing the sentence. JamieVicary (talk) 15:23, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have always taken the lower case t to be time, and felt it was actually appropriate — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:449:8200:A430:D133:A463:5DD3:3A24 (talk) 13:45, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Transliteration

According to reference 7 in the article of Riemann in the German Wikipedia, the paper was Über die Anzahl der Primzahlen unter einer gegebenen Größe, and not Ueber die Anzahl der Primzahlen unter einer gegebenen Grösse, as it reads in the article. In many publications, for example, Möbius is not written Moebius, nor is it in Wikipedia. The name of the article may well be On the number..., but the original German name should be correct, without transliterations. K9re11 (talk) 11:16, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the published title really was "Ueber...". See the image I just added in the article. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 18:08, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]