How not to prove the Riemann hypothesis

complex-analysis fake-proofs riemann-hypothesis

I remember reading somewhere that there is a (probably a family of) quick false proof of the Riemann hypothesis that starts by using complex logarithms in a bad way, then does some elementary calculations and out pops the result. A perusal of the General Mathematics section of the arXiv also shows an abundance of presumably false proofs of the same. These tend to be somewhat... unclear and I'd prefer avoiding to look at them in any detail.

Question: Can anyone describe a quick false proof of the Riemann hypothesis?

Preferably I'd like one that has a very clear false step that misuses complex logarithms or $n$-th roots or some such gadget in an identifiable way. This is both because of my curiosity, and because I figure I could use it as an exercise problem for undergrads (if I ever end up teaching a course on complex analysis) to explain why they should be careful about taking logarithms.


Solution 1:

Matthew Watkins has a collection of 'proofs' here.

Describe them would make you loose part of their flavor...
(errors are sometimes commented and the oldest and 'less serious' ;-) are at the end...)

Related

Evaluate $\int_{0}^{\pi/4}x\ln^{2}(\sin(x))dx$
On prime factors of $n^2+1$
Why are particular combinations of algebraic properties "richer" than others?
How do I calculate a dihedral angle given Cartesian coordinates?
What's the correct notation for log squared?
Prove the integral evaluates to $\frac{K}{\pi}$
How do you write a differential operator as a matrix?
Delightful integral: $\int _0^{\frac{\pi }{2}}x\ln \left(\sin \left(x\right)\right)\ln ^2\left(\cos \left(x\right)\right)\:dx.$
Is there a fundamental theorem of calculus for improper integrals?
Fundamental group of the connected sum of manifolds
How do you remember theorems?
Prove that if $x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_n>0$, then $(1+x_1)(1+x_1+x_2)\ldots(1+x_1+x_2+\ldots+x_n) \ge \sqrt{(n+1)^{n+1}}\sqrt{x_1x_2\ldots x_n}$.