What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The problem that this paper attempts to solve is to verify the correctness of Shekhar Suman's proof of the irrationality of ζ(5). Specifically, Suman claimed that he had proven the irrationality of ζ(5), but the authors of this paper found logical errors in Suman's proof and analyzed these errors in detail. ### Background of the Paper - **Riemann Zeta Function**: The Riemann zeta function is defined as \(\zeta(n)=\sum_{k \geq 1}\frac{1}{k^n}\) for \(n \geq 2\). - **Known Results**: - Euler proved that \(\zeta(2)=\frac{\pi^2}{6}\). - More generally, \(\zeta(2n)=-\frac{B_{2n}(2\pi i)^{2n}}{2(2n)!}\), where \(B_m\) is the \(m\)-th Bernoulli number. - Apéry proved that \(\zeta(3)\) is irrational. - Ball and Rivoal proved that the \(\mathbb{Q}\)-vector space of odd zeta values is infinite - dimensional. - Zudilin proved that at least one of \(\zeta(5)\), \(\zeta(7)\), \(\zeta(9)\), \(\zeta(11)\) is irrational. ### Main Contributions of the Paper 1. **Analysis of Suman's Proof**: - Suman's proof is based on the assumption that a linear Diophantine equation [5, Eq. (47)] has no integer solutions. - However, the authors pointed out that this equation actually has integer solutions, thus negating Suman's conclusion. - Specifically, when \(n = 1\), the equation \(a - 2b=-k_i b\) has solutions \(a = 2b\) or \(a = b\), which contradicts Suman's assumption. 2. **Standard Method of Irrationality Proof**: - The authors reviewed a standard method of irrationality proof (Proposition 3.1) and pointed out that Suman's method does not conform to this standard. - The standard method requires constructing a sequence of rational number pairs \((a_n, b_n)\) such that \(0 < |a_n\alpha - b_n| < \epsilon^n\) holds for sufficiently large \(n\) and other conditions are satisfied. - Numerical verification shows that Suman's method does not satisfy these conditions. ### Conclusion - Suman's proof of the irrationality of \(\zeta(5)\) is incorrect because his key assumption (the equation [5, Eq. (47)] has no integer solutions) is wrong. - The irrationality of \(\zeta(5)\) remains an open problem and requires further research. ### References - [1] R. Apéry, *Irrationalité de ζ(2) et ζ(3)*, Astérisque, 61 (1979) 11–13. - [2] K. Ball and T. Rivoal, *Irrationalité d’une infinité de valeurs de la fonction zêta aux entiers impairs*, Invent. Math., 146.1 (2001) 193–207. - [3] F. Beukers, *A note on the irrationality of ζ(2) and ζ(3)*, Bull. Lond. Math. Soc., 11.3 (1979) 268–272. - [4] D. Huylebrouck, *Similarities in Irr

A Note on a Recent Attempt to Prove the Irrationality of $ζ(5)$

A note on the Irrationality of $ζ(5)$ and Higher Odd Zeta Values

A Note on the Number of Irrational Odd Zeta Values

Sum of square roots of prime numbers is irrational

An elementary proof of the irrationality of Tschakaloff series

Irrationality proofs for zeta values, moduli spaces and dinner parties

Geometric Proof of the Irrationality of Square-Roots for Select Integers

A Proof of Irrationality of $π$ by Contraposition

On the irrationality of certain [math]-adic zeta values

Many $p$-adic odd zeta values are irrational

Irrationality measure and lower bounds for pi(x)

On the irrationality of certain $2$-adic zeta values

Primes, Pi, and Irrationality Measure

Two hypergeometric tales and a new irrationality measure of $ζ(2)$

A well-motivated proof that pi is irrational

Attempting to Prove the Riemann Hypothesis through the Reflection Formula

On the zeros of the Riemann zeta function

The linear independence of $1$, $ζ(2)$, and $L(2,χ_{-3})$

Disproof of the Riemann Hypothesis

Recurrent proofs of the irrationality of certain trigonometric values

A Simple Proof of the Riemann Hypothesis