I am told that when computing the zeroes one does not use the normal definition of the rieman zeta function but an altogether different one that obeys the same functional relation. What is this other function that they use explicitly given?
Also if I were to take one of these non trivial zeroes and plug it into the original definition would my answer tend towards zero as I evaluate the series?
If you want the analytic continuation of the zeta function to the zone where all the non-trivial zeros have been found so far, you can do as follows:
$$\begin{align*}(1)&\;\zeta(s)=\sum_{n=1}^\infty\frac1{n^s}\\ (2)&\;\sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac2{(2n)^s}=\frac1{2^{s-1}}\zeta(s)\end{align*}\;\;\;\;\left.\right\}\;\;\;\text{Re}\,(s)>1$$
Now, substract (2) from (1):
$$\left(1-\frac1{2^{s-1}}\right)\zeta(s)=\frac1{1^s}-\frac1{2^s}+\frac1{3^s}-\ldots=\sum_{n=1}^\infty(-1)^{n-1}\frac1{n^s}=:\eta(s)\implies$$
$$\implies\;\zeta(s)=\left(1-2^{1-s}\right)^{-1}\eta(s)$$
It's a nice exercise now to prove the right hand side is analytic on $\;1\neq\;\text{Re}\,(s)>0\,$ .
Note that there are some potentially problematic points:
$$1-2^{s-1}=0\iff e^{(s-1)\log2}=1\iff (s-1)=\frac{2k\pi i}{\log2}\;,\;\;k\in\Bbb Z$$
Yet these are removable singularities, so no problem...