The Dual-Pairing Theorem and the Origin of the Critical Line
To formalize the Dual-Pairing Theorem, we must move away from measuring the number line and toward balancing it.
Most approaches to the Riemann Hypothesis begin by asking where the “center” of the critical strip lies. That framing is already misleading. In a generative system, the center is not guessed, averaged, or measured — it is the only stable point allowed by symmetry.
This post shows how the critical line \\[ \Re(s) = \tfrac{1}{2} \\] emerges as a fixed point of balance, not as a statistical artifact.
Theorem 1: Dual-Pairing Scale Invariance
1. Axiom of the Total System (Closure)
Consider a closed generative system of finite capacity \\(N\\).
Every element \\(n\\) in the system exists in a reciprocal relationship with a dual element \\(\\tilde{n}\\) such that:
\\[ n \cdot \\tilde{n} = N \\]This equation does not define a coordinate system — it defines a closure constraint.
- No element exists independently
- Every operation must preserve the pairing between a part (\\(n\\)) and its dual (\\(\\tilde{n}\\))
- Valid structure is defined by balance, not position
2. The Generative State Function
We define the state of an element \\(n\\) as a vector in phase-space, weighted by an intrinsic scale factor:
\\[ \\Psi(n) = n^{\\sigma} \\, e^{i n t} \\]- Amplitude \\(n^{\\sigma}\\): weight, density, or capacity contribution
- Phase \\(n t\\): timing or relational position
The exponent \\(\\sigma\\) is not yet fixed. It encodes how influence is distributed across the system.
3. Requirement of Scale Invariance
For the system to be generative (self-consistent), interactions must not privilege any specific scale.
The cross-interaction between an element and its dual must therefore be independent of \\(n\\). We define the interaction amplitude as:
\\[ A(n) = n^{\\sigma} \\, \\tilde{n}^{\\,1-\\sigma} \\]
Why \\(1-\\sigma\\)?
If one side of the pairing occupies a fraction \\(\\sigma\\) of the system’s capacity, the remaining potential capacity must be its complement.
This preserves total unity.
4. Derivation of the Critical Line
Substitute the dual relation \\(\\tilde{n} = \\frac{N}{n}\\) into the interaction amplitude:
\\[ A(n) = n^{\\sigma} \\left(\\frac{N}{n}\\right)^{1-\\sigma} \\]Simplifying:
\\[ A(n) = N^{1-\\sigma} \\, n^{\\sigma-(1-\\sigma)} = N^{1-\\sigma} \\, n^{2\\sigma-1} \\]For scale invariance, \\(A(n)\\) must be independent of \\(n\\). This requires:
\\[ 2\\sigma - 1 = 0 \\] \\[ \\boxed{\\sigma = \\tfrac{1}{2}} \\]Ontological Interpretation
The value \\(\\sigma = \\tfrac{1}{2}\\) is not a statistical average or heuristic guess. It is the fixed point of symmetry in a closed multiplicative system.
- \\(\\sigma > \\tfrac{1}{2}\\): weight collapses toward large numbers (stretching)
- \\(\\sigma < \\tfrac{1}{2}\\): weight collapses toward small numbers (shrinking)
- \\(\\sigma = \\tfrac{1}{2}\\): perfect recursion and balance
At this point, the relationship between the smallest and largest elements mirrors the relationship between any other dual pair.
Why This Avoids the “Log Trap”
No logarithms appear. No density estimates. No asymptotic counting.
The critical line emerges from multiplicative closure alone:
\\[ n \\cdot \\tilde{n} = N \\]The line \\(\\Re(s)=\\tfrac{1}{2}\\) is therefore a geometric necessity of balance — not a byproduct of measurement.
The number line is not being measured. It is being held together.
Next steps include formalizing Factorization Instability (why only primes survive this balance) and the Pentagonal Sieve Lattice.
No comments:
Post a Comment