Draft:History of number theory
![]() | Draft article not currently submitted for review.
This is a draft Articles for creation (AfC) submission. It is not currently pending review. While there are no deadlines, abandoned drafts may be deleted after six months. To edit the draft click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window. To be accepted, a draft should:
It is strongly discouraged to write about yourself, your business or employer. If you do so, you must declare it. Where to get help
How to improve a draft
You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Editor resources
Last edited by Toukouyori Mimoto (talk | contribs) 40 hours ago. (Update) |
originally forked from the history section in the number theory article Number theory is the branch of mathematics that studies integers and their properties and relations.[1] The integers comprise a set that extends the set of natural numbers to include number and the negation of natural numbers . Number theorists study prime numbers as well as the properties of mathematical objects constructed from integers (for example, rational numbers), or defined as generalizations of the integers (for example, algebraic integers).[2][3]
Number theory is closely related to arithmetic and some authors use the terms as synonyms.[4] However, the word "arithmetic" is used today to mean the study of numerical operations and extends to the real numbers.[5] In a more specific sense, number theory is restricted to the study of integers and focuses on their properties and relationships.[6] Traditionally, it is known as higher arithmetic.[7] By the early twentieth century, the term number theory had been widely adopted.[note 1] The term number means whole numbers, which refers to either the natural numbers or the integers.[8][9][10]
Elementary number theory studies aspects of integers that can be investigated using elementary methods such as elementary proofs.[11] Analytic number theory, by contrast, relies on complex numbers and techniques from analysis and calculus.[12] Algebraic number theory employs algebraic structures such as fields and rings to analyze the properties of and relations between numbers. Geometric number theory uses concepts from geometry to study numbers.[13] Further branches of number theory are probabilistic number theory,[14] combinatorial number theory,[15] computational number theory,[16] and applied number theory, which examines the application of number theory to science and technology.[17]
Origins
[edit]Ancient Mesopotamia
[edit]
The earliest historical find of an arithmetical nature is a fragment of a table: Plimpton 322 (Larsa, Mesopotamia, c. 1800 BC), a broken clay tablet, contains a list of "Pythagorean triples", that is, integers such that . The triples are too numerous and too large to have been obtained by brute force. The heading over the first column reads: "The takiltum of the diagonal which has been subtracted such that the width..."[18]
The table's layout suggests that it was constructed by means of what amounts, in modern language, to the identity
which is implicit in routine Old Babylonian exercises. If some other method was used, the triples were first constructed and then reordered by , presumably for actual use as a "table", for example, with a view to applications.[19]
It is not known what these applications may have been, or whether there could have been any; Babylonian astronomy, for example, truly came into its own many centuries later. It has been suggested instead that the table was a source of numerical examples for school problems.[20][note 2] Plimpton 322 tablet is the only surviving evidence of what today would be called number theory within Babylonian mathematics, though a kind of Babylonian algebra was much more developed.[21]
Ancient Greece
[edit]Although other civilizations probably influenced Greek mathematics at the beginning,[22] all evidence of such borrowings appear relatively late,[23][24] and it is likely that Greek arithmētikḗ (the theoretical or philosophical study of numbers) is an indigenous tradition. Aside from a few fragments, most of what is known about Greek mathematics in the 6th to 4th centuries BC (the Archaic and Classical periods) comes through either the reports of contemporary non-mathematicians or references from mathematical works in the early Hellenistic period.[25] In the case of number theory, this means largely Plato, Aristotle, and Euclid.
Plato had a keen interest in mathematics, and distinguished clearly between arithmētikḗ and calculation (logistikē). Plato reports in his dialogue Theaetetus that Theodorus had proven that are irrational. Theaetetus, a disciple of Theodorus's, worked on distinguishing different kinds of incommensurables, and was thus arguably a pioneer in the study of number systems. Aristotle further claimed that the philosophy of Plato closely followed the teachings of the Pythagoreans,[26] and Cicero repeats this claim: Platonem ferunt didicisse Pythagorea omnia ("They say Plato learned all things Pythagorean").[27]
Euclid devoted part of his Elements (Books VII–IX) to topics that belong to elementary number theory, including prime numbers and divisibility.[28] He gave an algorithm, the Euclidean algorithm, for computing the greatest common divisor of two numbers (Prop. VII.2) and a proof implying the infinitude of primes (Prop. IX.20). There is also older material likely based on Pythagorean teachings (Prop. IX.21–34), such as "odd times even is even" and "if an odd number measures [= divides] an even number, then it also measures [= divides] half of it".[29] This is all that is needed to prove that is irrational.[30] Pythagoreans apparently gave great importance to the odd and the even.[31] The discovery that is irrational is credited to the early Pythagoreans, sometimes assigned to Hippasus, who was expelled or split from the Pythagorean community as a result.[32][33] This forced a distinction between numbers (integers and the rationals—the subjects of arithmetic) and lengths and proportions (which may be identified with real numbers, whether rational or not).
The Pythagorean tradition also spoke of so-called polygonal or figurate numbers.[34] While square numbers, cubic numbers, etc., are seen now as more natural than triangular numbers, pentagonal numbers, etc., the study of the sums of triangular and pentagonal numbers would prove fruitful in the early modern period (17th to early 19th centuries).
An epigram published by Lessing in 1773 appears to be a letter sent by Archimedes to Eratosthenes.[35] The epigram proposed what has become known as Archimedes's cattle problem; its solution (absent from the manuscript) requires solving an indeterminate quadratic equation (which reduces to what would later be misnamed Pell's equation). As far as it is known, such equations were first successfully treated by Indian mathematicians. It is not known whether Archimedes himself had a method of solution.
Late Antiquity
[edit]
Aside from the elementary work of Neopythagoreans such as Nicomachus and Theon of Smyrna, the foremost authority in arithmētikḗ in Late Antiquity was Diophantus of Alexandria, who probably lived in the 3rd century AD, approximately five hundred years after Euclid. Little is known about his life, but he wrote two works that are extant: On Polygonal Numbers, a short treatise written in the Euclidean manner on the subject, and the Arithmetica, a work on pre-modern algebra (namely, the use of algebra to solve numerical problems). Six out of the thirteen books of Diophantus's Arithmetica survive in the original Greek and four more survive in an Arabic translation. The Arithmetica is a collection of worked-out problems where the task is invariably to find rational solutions to a system of polynomial equations, usually of the form or . In modern parlance, Diophantine equations are polynomial equations to which rational or integer solutions are sought.
Asia
[edit]The Chinese remainder theorem appears as an exercise[36] in Sunzi Suanjing (between the third and fifth centuries).[37] (There is one important step glossed over in Sunzi's solution:[note 3] it is the problem that was later solved by Āryabhaṭa's Kuṭṭaka – see below.) The result was later generalized with a complete solution called Da-yan-shu (大衍術) in Qin Jiushao's 1247 Mathematical Treatise in Nine Sections[38] which was translated into English in early nineteenth century by British missionary Alexander Wylie.[39] There is also some numerical mysticism in Chinese mathematics,[note 4] but, unlike that of the Pythagoreans, it seems to have led nowhere.
While Greek astronomy probably influenced Indian learning, to the point of introducing trigonometry,[40] it seems to be the case that Indian mathematics is otherwise an autochthonous tradition;[41] in particular, there is no evidence that Euclid's Elements reached India before the eighteenth century.[42] Āryabhaṭa (476–550 AD) showed that pairs of simultaneous congruences , could be solved by a method he called kuṭṭaka, or pulveriser;[43] this is a procedure close to (a generalization of) the Euclidean algorithm, which was probably discovered independently in India.[44] Āryabhaṭa seems to have had in mind applications to astronomical calculations.[40]
Brahmagupta (628 AD) started the systematic study of indefinite quadratic equations—in particular, the misnamed Pell equation, in which Archimedes may have first been interested, and which did not start to be solved in the West until the time of Fermat and Euler. Later Sanskrit authors would follow, using Brahmagupta's technical terminology. A general procedure (the chakravala, or "cyclic method") for solving Pell's equation was finally found by Jayadeva (cited in the eleventh century; his work is otherwise lost); the earliest surviving exposition appears in Bhāskara II's Bīja-gaṇita (twelfth century).[45]
Indian mathematics remained largely unknown in Europe until the late eighteenth century;[46] Brahmagupta and Bhāskara's work was translated into English in 1817 by Henry Colebrooke.[47]
Arithmetic in the Islamic golden age
[edit]
In the early ninth century, the caliph al-Ma'mun ordered translations of many Greek mathematical works and at least one Sanskrit work (the Sindhind, which may[48] or may not[49] be Brahmagupta's Brāhmasphuṭasiddhānta). Diophantus's main work, the Arithmetica, was translated into Arabic by Qusta ibn Luqa (820–912). Part of the treatise al-Fakhri (by al-Karajī, 953 – c. 1029) builds on it to some extent. According to Rashed Roshdi, Al-Karajī's contemporary Ibn al-Haytham knew[50] what would later be called Wilson's theorem.
Western Europe in the Middle Ages
[edit]Other than a treatise on squares in arithmetic progression by Fibonacci—who traveled and studied in north Africa and Constantinople—no number theory to speak of was done in western Europe during the Middle Ages. Matters started to change in Europe in the late Renaissance, thanks to a renewed study of the works of Greek antiquity. A catalyst was the textual emendation and translation into Latin of Diophantus' Arithmetica.[51]
Early modern number theory
[edit]Fermat
[edit]
Pierre de Fermat (1607–1665) never published his writings but communicated through correspondence instead. Accordingly, his work on number theory is contained almost entirely in letters to mathematicians and in private marginal notes.[52] Although he drew inspiration from classical sources, in his notes and letters Fermat scarcely wrote any proofs—he had no models in the area.[53]
Over his lifetime, Fermat made the following contributions to the field:
- One of Fermat's first interests was perfect numbers (which appear in Euclid, Elements IX) and amicable numbers;[note 5] these topics led him to work on integer divisors, which were from the beginning among the subjects of the correspondence (1636 onwards) that put him in touch with the mathematical community of the day.[54]
- In 1638, Fermat claimed, without proof, that all whole numbers can be expressed as the sum of four squares or fewer.[55]
- Fermat's little theorem (1640):[56] if a is not divisible by a prime p, then
- If a and b are coprime, then is not divisible by any prime congruent to −1 modulo 4;[57] and every prime congruent to 1 modulo 4 can be written in the form .[58] These two statements also date from 1640; in 1659, Fermat stated to Huygens that he had proven the latter statement by the method of infinite descent.[59]
- In 1657, Fermat posed the problem of solving as a challenge to English mathematicians. The problem was solved in a few months by Wallis and Brouncker.[60] Fermat considered their solution valid, but pointed out they had provided an algorithm without a proof (as had Jayadeva and Bhaskara, though Fermat was not aware of this). He stated that a proof could be found by infinite descent.
- Fermat stated and proved (by infinite descent) in the appendix to Observations on Diophantus (Obs. XLV)[61] that has no non-trivial solutions in the integers. Fermat also mentioned to his correspondents that has no non-trivial solutions, and that this could also be proven by infinite descent.[62] The first known proof is due to Euler (1753; indeed by infinite descent).[63]
- Fermat claimed (Fermat's Last Theorem) to have shown there are no solutions to for all ; this claim appears in his annotations in the margins of his copy of Diophantus.
Euler
[edit]
The interest of Leonhard Euler (1707–1783) in number theory was first spurred in 1729, when a friend of his, the amateur[note 6] Goldbach, pointed him towards some of Fermat's work on the subject.[64] This has been called the "rebirth" of modern number theory,[65] after Fermat's relative lack of success in getting his contemporaries' attention for the subject.[66] Euler's work on number theory includes the following:[67]
- Proofs for Fermat's statements. This includes Fermat's little theorem (generalised by Euler to non-prime moduli); the fact that if and only if ; initial work towards a proof that every integer is the sum of four squares (the first complete proof is by Joseph-Louis Lagrange (1770), soon improved by Euler himself[68]); the lack of non-zero integer solutions to (implying the case n=4 of Fermat's last theorem, the case n=3 of which Euler also proved by a related method).
- Pell's equation, first misnamed by Euler.[69] He wrote on the link between continued fractions and Pell's equation.[70]
- First steps towards analytic number theory. In his work of sums of four squares, partitions, pentagonal numbers, and the distribution of prime numbers, Euler pioneered the use of what can be seen as analysis (in particular, infinite series) in number theory. Since he lived before the development of complex analysis, most of his work is restricted to the formal manipulation of power series. He did, however, do some very notable (though not fully rigorous) early work on what would later be called the Riemann zeta function.[71]
- Quadratic forms. Following Fermat's lead, Euler did further research on the question of which primes can be expressed in the form , some of it prefiguring quadratic reciprocity.[72]
- Diophantine equations. Euler worked on some Diophantine equations of genus 0 and 1.[73] In particular, he studied Diophantus's work; he tried to systematise it, but the time was not yet ripe for such an endeavour—algebraic geometry was still in its infancy.[74] He did notice there was a connection between Diophantine problems and elliptic integrals,[74] whose study he had himself initiated.
Lagrange, Legendre, and Gauss
[edit]
Joseph-Louis Lagrange (1736–1813) was the first to give full proofs of some of Fermat's and Euler's work and observations; for instance, the four-square theorem and the basic theory of the misnamed "Pell's equation" (for which an algorithmic solution was found by Fermat and his contemporaries, and also by Jayadeva and Bhaskara II before them.) He also studied quadratic forms in full generality (as opposed to ), including defining their equivalence relation, showing how to put them in reduced form, etc.
Adrien-Marie Legendre (1752–1833) was the first to state the law of quadratic reciprocity. He also conjectured what amounts to the prime number theorem and Dirichlet's theorem on arithmetic progressions. He gave a full treatment of the equation [75] and worked on quadratic forms along the lines later developed fully by Gauss.[76] In his old age, he was the first to prove Fermat's Last Theorem for (completing work by Peter Gustav Lejeune Dirichlet, and crediting both him and Sophie Germain).[77]
Carl Friedrich Gauss (1777–1855) worked in a wide variety of fields in both mathematics and physics including number theory, analysis, differential geometry, geodesy, magnetism, astronomy and optics. The Disquisitiones Arithmeticae (1801), which he wrote three years earlier when he was 21, had an immense influence in the area of number theory and set its agenda for much of the 19th century. Gauss proved in this work the law of quadratic reciprocity and developed the theory of quadratic forms (in particular, defining their composition). He also introduced some basic notation (congruences) and devoted a section to computational matters, including primality tests.[78] The last section of the Disquisitiones established a link between roots of unity and number theory:
The theory of the division of the circle...which is treated in sec. 7 does not belong by itself to arithmetic, but its principles can only be drawn from higher arithmetic.[79]
In this way, Gauss arguably made forays towards Évariste Galois's work and the area algebraic number theory.
Maturity and division into subfields
[edit]
Starting early in the nineteenth century, the following developments gradually took place:
- The rise to self-consciousness of number theory (or higher arithmetic) as a field of study.[80]
- The development of much of modern mathematics necessary for basic modern number theory: complex analysis, group theory, Galois theory—accompanied by greater rigor in analysis and abstraction in algebra.
- The rough subdivision of number theory into its modern subfields—in particular, analytic and algebraic number theory.
Algebraic number theory may be said to start with the study of reciprocity and cyclotomy, but truly came into its own with the development of abstract algebra and early ideal theory and valuation theory; see below. A conventional starting point for analytic number theory is Dirichlet's theorem on arithmetic progressions (1837),[81] whose proof introduced L-functions and involved some asymptotic analysis and a limiting process on a real variable.[82] The first use of analytic ideas in number theory actually goes back to Euler (1730s),[83] who used formal power series and non-rigorous (or implicit) limiting arguments. The use of complex analysis in number theory comes later: the work of Bernhard Riemann (1859) on the zeta function is the canonical starting point;[84] Jacobi's four-square theorem (1839), which predates it, belongs to an initially different strand that has by now taken a leading role in analytic number theory (modular forms).[85]
The American Mathematical Society awards the Cole Prize in Number Theory. Moreover, number theory is one of the three mathematical subdisciplines rewarded by the Fermat Prize.
References
[edit]- ^ Karatsuba, A.A. (2020). "Number theory". Encyclopedia of Mathematics. Springer. Retrieved 2025-05-03.
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (link) - ^ Moore, Patrick (2004). "Number theory". In Lerner, K. Lee; Lerner, Brenda Wilmoth (eds.). The Gale Encyclopedia of Science. Vol. 4 (3rd ed.). Gale. ISBN 0-7876-7559-8.
- ^ Tanton, James (2005). "Number theory". Encyclopedia of Mathematics. New York: Facts On File. pp. 359–60. ISBN 0-8160-5124-0.
- ^
- ^
- ^
- Wilson 2020, pp. 1–2
- Karatsuba 2020
- Campbell 2012, p. 33
- Robbins 2006, p. 1
- ^
- Duverney 2010, p. v
- Robbins 2006, p. 1
- ^ Effinger, Gove; Mullen, Gary L. (2022). "Divisibility in the Integers Z". Elementary Number Theory. Boca Raton: CRC Press. ISBN 978-1-003-19311-1.
- ^ Weisstein, Eric W. (2003). "Number Theory". CRC Concise Encyclopedia of Mathematics (2nd ed.). Chapman & Hall/CRC. p. 2047. ISBN 1-58488-347-2.
- ^ Weisstein, Eric W. (2003). "Whole Number". CRC Concisse Encyclopedia of Mathematics (2nd ed.). Chapman & Hall/CRC. p. 3202. ISBN 1-58488-347-2.
- ^
- ^
- ^
- ^ Kubilyus 2018
- ^ Pomerance & Sárközy 1995, p. 969
- ^ Pomerance 2010
- ^
- ^ Neugebauer & Sachs 1945, p. 40 . The term takiltum is problematic. Robson prefers the rendering "The holding-square of the diagonal from which 1 is torn out, so that the short side comes up...".Robson 2001, p. 192
- ^ Neugebauer (Neugebauer 1969, pp. 36–40) discusses the table in detail and mentions in passing Euclid's method in modern notation (Neugebauer 1969, p. 39) .
- ^ Friberg 1981, p. 302.
- ^ van der Waerden 1961, p. 63-75.
- ^ van der Waerden 1961, p. 87-90
- ^ Iamblichus, Life of Pythagoras,(trans., for example, Guthrie 1987 ) cited in van der Waerden 1961, p. 108 . See also Porphyry, Life of Pythagoras, paragraph 6, in Guthrie 1987
- ^ Herodotus (II. 81) and Isocrates (Busiris 28), cited in: Huffman 2011 . On Thales, see Eudemus ap. Proclus, 65.7, (for example, Morrow 1992, p. 52 ) cited in: O'Grady 2004, p. 1 . Proclus was using a work by Eudemus of Rhodes (now lost), the Catalogue of Geometers. See also introduction, Morrow 1992, p. xxx on Proclus's reliability.
- ^ Boyer & Merzbach 1991, p. 82.
- ^ Metaphysics, 1.6.1 (987a)
- ^ Tusc. Disput. 1.17.39.
- ^ Corry, Leo (2015). "Construction Problems and Numerical Problems in the Greek Mathematical Tradition". A Brief History of Numbers. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-870259-7.
- ^ Becker 1936, p. 533 , cited in: van der Waerden 1961, p. 108 .
- ^ Becker 1936.
- ^ van der Waerden 1961, p. 109.
- ^ Plato, Theaetetus, p. 147 B, (for example, Jowett 1871 ), cited in von Fritz 2004, p. 212 : "Theodorus was writing out for us something about roots, such as the roots of three or five, showing that they are incommensurable by the unit;..." See also Spiral of Theodorus.
- ^ von Fritz 2004.
- ^ Heath 1921, p. 76.
- ^ Vardi 1998, pp. 305–319.
- ^ Sunzi Suanjing, Chapter 3, Problem 26. This can be found in Lam & Ang 2004, pp. 219–220 , which contains a full translation of the Suan Ching (based on Qian 1963 ). See also the discussion in Lam & Ang 2004, pp. 138–140 .
- ^ The date of the text has been narrowed down to 220–420 AD (Yan Dunjie) or 280–473 AD (Wang Ling) through internal evidence (= taxation systems assumed in the text). See Lam & Ang 2004, pp. 27–28 .
- ^ Dauben 2007, p. 310
- ^ Libbrecht 1973
- ^ a b Plofker 2008, p. 119.
- ^ Any early contact between Babylonian and Indian mathematics remains conjectural (Plofker 2008, p. 42) .
- ^ Mumford 2010, p. 387.
- ^ Āryabhaṭa, Āryabhatīya, Chapter 2, verses 32–33, cited in: Plofker 2008, pp. 134–140 . See also Clark 1930, pp. 42–50 . A slightly more explicit description of the kuṭṭaka was later given in Brahmagupta, Brāhmasphuṭasiddhānta, XVIII, 3–5 (in Colebrooke 1817, p. 325 , cited in Clark 1930, p. 42 ).
- ^ Mumford 2010, p. 388.
- ^ Plofker 2008, p. 194.
- ^ Plofker 2008, p. 283.
- ^ Colebrooke 1817.
- ^ Colebrooke 1817, p. lxv , cited in Hopkins 1990, p. 302 . See also the preface in Sachau & Bīrūni 1888 cited in Smith 1958, pp. 168
- ^ Pingree 1968, pp. 97–125 , and Pingree 1970, pp. 103–123 , cited in Plofker 2008, p. 256 .
- ^ Rashed 1980, pp. 305–321.
- ^ Bachet, 1621, following a first attempt by Xylander, 1575
- ^ Weil 1984, pp. 45–46.
- ^ Weil 1984, p. 118 . This was more so in number theory than in other areas (Mahoney 1994, pp. 283–289 ). Bachet's own proofs were "ludicrously clumsy" (Weil 1984, p. 33) .
- ^ Mahoney 1994, pp. 48, 53–54 . The initial subjects of Fermat's correspondence included divisors ("aliquot parts") and many subjects outside number theory; see the list in the letter from Fermat to Roberval, 22.IX.1636, Tannery & Henry 1891, Vol. II, pp. 72, 74 , cited in Mahoney 1994, p. 54 .
- ^ Faulkner, Nicholas; Hosch, William L. (2017). "Numbers and Measurements". Encyclopaedia Britannica. ISBN 978-1-5383-0042-8. Retrieved 2019-08-06.
- ^ Tannery & Henry 1891, Vol. II, p. 209 , Letter XLVI from Fermat to Frenicle, 1640, cited in Weil 1984, p. 56
- ^ Tannery & Henry 1891, Vol. II, p. 204 , cited in Weil 1984, p. 63 . All of the following citations from Fermat's Varia Opera are taken from Weil 1984, Chap. II . The standard Tannery & Henry work includes a revision of Fermat's posthumous Varia Opera Mathematica originally prepared by his son (Fermat 1679) .
- ^ Tannery & Henry 1891, Vol. II, p. 213.
- ^ Tannery & Henry 1891, Vol. II, p. 423.
- ^ Weil 1984, p. 92.
- ^ Tannery & Henry 1891, Vol. I, pp. 340–341.
- ^ Weil 1984, p. 115.
- ^ Weil 1984, pp. 115–116.
- ^ Weil 1984, pp. 2, 172.
- ^ Weil 1984, pp. 1–2.
- ^ Weil 1984, p. 2 and Varadarajan 2006, p. 37
- ^ Varadarajan 2006, p. 39 and Weil 1984, pp. 176–189
- ^ Weil 1984, pp. 178–179.
- ^ Weil 1984, p. 174 . Euler was generous in giving credit to others (Varadarajan 2006, p. 14) , not always correctly.
- ^ Weil 1984, p. 183.
- ^ Varadarajan 2006, pp. 45–55 ; see also chapter III.
- ^ Varadarajan 2006, pp. 44–47.
- ^ Varadarajan 2006, pp. 55–56.
- ^ a b Weil 1984, p. 181.
- ^ Weil 1984, pp. 327–328.
- ^ Weil 1984, pp. 332–334.
- ^ Weil 1984, pp. 337–338.
- ^ Goldstein & Schappacher 2007, p. 14.
- ^ From the preface of Disquisitiones Arithmeticae; the translation is taken from Goldstein & Schappacher 2007, p. 16
- ^ See the discussion in section 5 of Goldstein & Schappacher 2007 . Early signs of self-consciousness are present already in letters by Fermat: thus his remarks on what number theory is, and how "Diophantus's work [...] does not really belong to [it]" (quoted in Weil 1984, p. 25 ).
- ^ Apostol 1976, p. 7.
- ^ See the proof in Davenport & Montgomery 2000, section 1
- ^ Iwaniec & Kowalski 2004, p. 1.
- ^ Granville 2008, pp. 322–348.
- ^ See the comment on the importance of modularity in Iwaniec & Kowalski 2004, p. 1
Cite error: There are <ref group=note>
tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=note}}
template (see the help page).