My discovery about mathematics

Naoto Meguro . Amateur.

                                   1

I indicate an elementary defect of the complex function theory.
You could not prove Riemann hypothesis in the consistent mathematics.

                                    2

You may define that (e⁰-1)/(e⁰-1)=1. 1=(e^t-1)(e⁰-1)/((e^t-1)(e⁰-1))=((e^t+0-1)-(e^t-1)-(e⁰-1))/((e^t-1)(e⁰-1))
=((0-(e⁰-1)/(e⁰-1))(1/(e^t-1))= -1/(e^t-1)→∞ (t→0).
Let's generalize this contradiction.
Let x(t)=∑_n∈N e_n(t-c)ⁿ be an integral function for which x(c)=0 and x´(c)=e₁≠0.
x(t)=(t-c)y(t). y(c)=e₁≠0. Define the function w(t) for w∈C by w(s)=w for ∀s∈C.
∀s((s∈C)→(x(s+s-s)-x(s)=0(s))∧((0(s)-x(s))/x(s)= -1(s))).
So (x(c+c-c)-x(c)-x(c))/(x(c)x(c))= -1/x(c)=∞.
Theorem 1. The complex function theory treating x(t) isn't consistent.
x(t+u-c)=∑_n∈N e_n((t-c)+(u-c))ⁿ=(∑_n∈N e_n(t-c)ⁿ)+(∑_n∈N e_n(u-c)ⁿ)+(t-c)(u-c)r(t-c,u-c)
=x(t)+x(u)+(t-c)(u-c)r(t-c,u-c). (r(z,w)=2e₂+3e₃(z+w)+e₄(4z²+6zw+4w²)+…)
|r(z,w)|≤∑_n∈N |e_n|(|z|+|w|)ⁿ≠∞. r(0,0)=2e₂.
Put I(t,u)=(x(t+u-c)-x(t)-x(u))/(x(t)x(u))=(t-c)(u-c)r(t-c,u-c)/(x(t)x(u)).
I(t,u)=(t-c)(u-c)r(t-c,u-c)/((t-c)(u-c)y(t)y(u))=r(t-c,u-c)/(y(t)y(u)) → 2e₂/e₁² (t→c,u→c).
I(c,c) is decided uniquely. But 2e₂/e₁²=I(c,c)=(x(c+c-c)-x(c)-x(c))/((x(c)x(c))=∞.
This is contradiction.♦

                                3

Riemann hypothesis becomes nonsense for you can set up that x(t)=(t-1)²ζ(t) and c= 1.
If x(t)∈Q[t] and c=0, r(t-c,u-c)∈Q[t,u] and I(t,u) ∈Q(t,u) and y(t) ∈Q[t] and 2e₂/e₁²∈Q.
The theory treating the elements of Q(t,u,…,v) treats these and isn't consistent and proves any
proposition. This may be the reason why Gauss didn't admit Abel's paper.