**ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE ZETA ZEROS III**Zeta zero #2 subdivision algorithm:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2082278#msg208227821.022... = f

_{2}(14.134725..., 63.636363...)

14.134725... = zeta zero #1 = f

_{1}(63.636363...)

Zeta zero #3 subdivision algorithm:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2082601#msg208260125.0108...= f

_{3}(14.134725..., 63.636363...)

Inverting the sequences, we get:

14.134725... = f

_{2}(21.022...)

14.134725... = f

_{3}(25.0108...)

f

_{2}(21.022...) = f

_{3}(25.0108...)

This means that the value of zeta zero #2 is totally related to the value of zeta zero #3, one figure depends on the value of the other.

Moreover, in order to attain the initial subdivision process, we had to carefully subdivide the entire 63.636363 units in length segment using the same ratios:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1950765#msg1950765Therefore we have four possible situations where a zeta zero would not be part of the sacred cubit sequence of subdivisions.

1. A zeta zeta is not located on the 1/2 critical line, but is to be found in parallel with the exact location of the sacred cubit subdivision point, or the zeta zero again is not located on the 1/2 critical line but still can be linked to the previous and next zeta zero using a sacred cubit distance.

This means that at a certain point, the algorithm using sacred cubits will break down, since the distance to the zeta zero which is not on the critical line will exceed the necessary upper/lower bounds approximations which necessitate smaller and smaller distances in order to find the next decimal places of the zeta zero.

It would make no sense at all for a zeta zero to be located exactly in parallel to the correct sacred cubit point, off the critical 1/2 line.

2. A zeta zero is simply not located on the critical 1/2 line, with no possible relation to the other zeta zeros which can be obtained using the sacred cubit algorithm. See case #4.

3. A zeta zero is located on the critical line, next to the correct sacred cubit subdivision point, but can be approximated using the algorithm. Again, it would make no sense at all to have ANOTHER zeta zero, still obeying the sacred cubit distances and algorithm, when we have the correct sacred cubit location of the correct zeta zero.

4. And now the case which no one else has ever thought of: a zeta zero which is located on the 1/2 critical line but which is not part of the subdivision algorithm, a "false" zeta zero.

This zeta zero would not be related at all, then, to the next and previous zeta zeros which are obtained using the sacred cubit algorithm; no relation to the first zeta zero, 14.134725..., or to the 63.636363... segment.

Let us suppose now that zeta zero #4 is such a "false" zero, with no connection to the algorithm.

We already know that zeta zeros #1, #2 and #3 are totally related to each other, in fact in order to obtain the value of zeta zero #3, we need to know the value of zeta zero #2.

Then, zeta zero #5 would also not be a part of the sacred cubit algorithm, since it could not be connected to zeta zeros #4 (the false zero) and also to zeta zero #3 (no continuity of the sacred cubit subdivision process).

Moreover, in order to get to the four main subdivision points for zeta zero #3 and zeta zero #2, from the left to the right, and from the right to the left, we would have had to employ the correct subdivision points, using the sacred cubit ratios, a fact no longer possible given that the entire process would break down in the vicinity of the false zero (twice on the same 63.636363... segment).

That is: a false zeta zero would mean that all of the other zeta zeros would be counted as "false" zeta zeros, with no relation to the first three zeta zeros.

The value of zeta zero #3 also depends on the value of zeta zero #4, since now we have a false zeta zero, this means that the value of zeta zero #3 is incorrect, since it can no longer be obtained as a function of zeta zero #4. Consequently, even the value of the first zeta zero, 14.134725..., would also be incorrect, since it has no possible mathematical relation to zeta zero #4.

That is why the presence of a "false" zeta zero, whether on or off the 1/2 critical line is not possible: the values of zeta zeros #1, #2 and #3 would have to be modified as well, a fact which is impossible, since we already have obtained their correct values and have proven that they are related to each other.

As currrent and future mathematicians will discover, all of the zeta zeros are related to each other, so then it will not be enough to prove Riemann's hypothesis for zeros off the 1/2 critical line, but they will have to consider the cases where a zeta zero is located on the 1/2 line, but which is not connected to any of the other zeta zeros.

"Riemann showed the importance of study of [the zeta] function for a range of problems in number theory centering around the distribution of prime numbers, and he further demonstrated that many of these problems could be settled if one knew the location of the zeros of this function. In spite of continued assaults and much progress since Riemann's initial investigations this tantalizing question remains one of the major unsolved problems in mathematics."

"It has become clear that the Riemann Hypothesis, whose resolution seems to hang tantalizingly just beyond our grasp holds the key to a variety of scientific and investigations. The making and breaking of modern codes, which depend on the properties of the prime numbers, have roots in the Hypothesis. In a series of extraordinary developments during the 1970s, it emerged that even the physics of the atomic nucleus is connected in ways not yet fully understood to this strange conundrum. ...Hunting down the solution to the Riemann Hypothesis has become an obsession for many - the veritable 'great white whale' of mathematical research. Yet despite determined efforts by generations of mathematicians, the Riemann Hypothesis defies resolution."

"...in one of those unexpected connections that make theoretical physics so delightful, the quantum chaology of spectra turns out to be deeply connected to the arithmetic of prime numbers, through the celebrated zeros of the Riemann zeta function: the zeros mimic quantum energy levels of a classically chaotic system. The connections is not only deep but also tantalizing, since its basis is still obscure - though it has been fruitful for both mathematics and physics."

"Right now, when we tackle problems without knowing the truth of the Riemann hypothesis, it's as if we have a screwdriver. But when we have it, it'll be more like a bulldozer."

"Proving the Riemann hypothesis won't end the story. It will prompt a sequence of even harder, more penetrating questions. Why do the primes achieve such a delicate balance between randomness and order? And if their patterns do encode the behaviour of quantum chaotic systems, what other jewels will we uncover when we dig deeper?"

"For centuries, mathematicians had been listening to the primes and hearing only disorganised noise. These numbers were like random notes wildly dotted on a mathematical stave with no discernible tune. Now Riemann had found new ears with which to listen to these mysterious tones. The sine-like waves that Riemann had created from the zeros in his zeta landscape revealed some hidden harmonic structure."

Riemann zeta zeros and zero point energy:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258884691_Riemann_zeta_zeros_and_zero-point_energyhttps://arxiv.org/pdf/1311.6681.pdfThe aether absorbed by the graviton wormholes activates the rotation of the two counterpropagating Riemann zeta function waves, which provide the weight of the particle. (m = density x volume, the density is given by the Gutzwiller trace formula which is related to the oscillatory/fluctuating series for the zeta zeros).

That is, everything we see, the entirety of matter, consists of sacred cubit distances united by the zeta function waves.