TITLE: Riemann hypothesis via absolute geometry
QUESTION [95 upvotes]: Several leading mathematicians (e.g. Yuri Manin) have written or said publicly that there is a known outline of a likely natural proof of the Riemann hypothesis using absolute algebraic geometry over the field of one element; some like Mochizuki and Durov are thinking of a possible application of $\mathbf{F}_1$-geometry to an even stronger abc conjecture. It seems that this is one of the driving forces for studying algebraic geometry over $\mathbf{F}_1$ and that the main obstacle to materializing this proof is that the geometry over $\mathbf{F}_1$ (cf. MO what is the field with one element, applications of algebaric geometry over a field with one element) is still not satisfactorily developed. Even a longer-term attacker of the Riemann hypothesis from outside the algebraic geometry community, Alain Connes, has concentrated recently in his collaboration with Katia Consani on the development of a version of geometry over $\mathbf{F}_1$.
Could somebody outline for us the ideas in the folklore sketch of the proof of the Riemann hypothesis via absolute geometry ? Is the proof analogous to the Deligne's proof (article) of the Riemann-Weil conjecture (see wikipedia and MathOverflow question equivalent-statements-of-riemann-hypothesis-in-the-weil-conjectures) ? 
Grothendieck was not happy with Deligne's proof, since he expected that the proof would/should be based on substantial progress on motives and the standard conjectures on algebraic cycles. Is there any envisioned progress in the motivic picture based on $\mathbf{F}_1$-geometry, or even envisioned extensions of the motivic picture ?

REPLY [27 votes]: Last fall, there was a conference in Nagoya about precisely this question (oddly enough, funded by a "Riemann Hypothesis" DARPA grant).  Since I was attending a different conference at the same university at the same time, I didn't get to see all of the talks.  However, Kedlaya's overview talk, which is listed among others on the schedule page, is rather informative.
Essentially, one hopes to get the completed $L$-function of an $\mathbb{F}_1$-scheme $X$ by cohomological means, by choosing a holomorphic family of operators (analogous to $1-q^{-s}\text{Frob}_q$ in the function field setting), and taking the determinant of the action on the cohomology of $X$ (which is expected to be infinite dimensional).  This is basically a generalization of the Grothendieck-Lefschetz trace formula to a cohomology theory that is not yet known.  There is some algebraic evidence that some form of the de Rham-Witt complex with a suitable alteration at infinity is such a cohomology theory, but I don't know what the appropriate family of operators ought to be.  I am told that there are promising hints coming from the world of dynamical systems and foliated spaces, and this is where non-commutative geometry seems to enter the picture.