Analytical framework reveals curvature implications for zeros on the critical line, indicating connections to the Riemann Hypothesis.
This preprint consolidates the URCM–Riemann programme into a unified analytical framework. The completed zeta function ξ(s) satisfies the functional equation ξ(s)=ξ(1−s), forcing first‑order stationarity of the log‑amplitude F(σ,t)=log|ξ(σ+it)| at σ=1/2. This symmetry makes all first‑order stability criteria tautological and therefore uninformative for the Riemann Hypothesis (RH). The first non‑tautological object is the second‑order curvature Kc(t)=∂σ2F(1/2,t). However, curvature positivity alone cannot distinguish a zero on the critical line from a symmetric off‑axis pair, since both configurations produce identical local curvature sign at σ=1/2. To overcome this, we introduce the non‑splitting functional S(t)=∫w(σ) [∂σ2F(σ,t)−∂σ2F(1/2,t)]2 dσ, which measures the transverse spread of curvature across the critical strip. We show analytically, using explicit local models, that: S(t)=0 for a zero located exactly on the critical line. S(t)>0 for any symmetric off‑axis zero pair. Symmetric weights cannot trivially annihilate S(t). A regularised functional Sε(t) remains strictly positive for off‑axis pairs uniformly as ε→0. The supplement provides full derivations, regularisation, and sensitivity proofs, closing the analytical gaps in the original definition of S(t). No claim of a proof of RH is made. The contribution is structural: RH is precisely the condition S(t)=0 for all t, i.e., the absence of transverse splitting of curvature wells in the completed zeta function.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Oleg Zmiievskyi (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: