Diagonalization of quadratic forms over euclidean rings - MathOverflow most recent 30 from http://mathoverflow.net2013-05-22T05:15:26Zhttp://mathoverflow.net/feeds/question/36208http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/rdfhttp://mathoverflow.net/questions/36208/diagonalization-of-quadratic-forms-over-euclidean-ringsDiagonalization of quadratic forms over euclidean ringsK.J. Moi2010-08-20T18:03:07Z2010-08-20T18:41:36Z
<p>Let $A$ be a commutative euclidean ring, (probably) with 2 a unit in $A$. I'm trying to compute Witt and Grothendieck-Witt rings and since $A$ is a PID any f.g.p. module over it is free so I only need think about forms on $A^n$. </p>
<p>Question: Is every (non-degenerate) quadratic form over $A$ diagonalizable?</p>
<p>A form $q$ is diagonalizable we can perform a base change on $A^n$ such that the matrix for $q$ becomes diagonal. Edit: Non-degenerate here means that any matrix associated to the form is invertible.</p>
<p>From Milnor-Husemoller's book I know this is true if $A$ is local. If I can show that any non-degenerate quadratic form on $A^n$ represents some unit ($q(x) = u$ a unit for some $x \in A^n$) then the statement holds by cor. I.3.3 in Mil-Hus. </p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/36208/diagonalization-of-quadratic-forms-over-euclidean-rings/36210#36210Answer by Robin Chapman for Diagonalization of quadratic forms over euclidean ringsRobin Chapman2010-08-20T18:29:28Z2010-08-20T18:29:28Z<p>Quadratic forms over $\mathbb{Z}$ don't diagonalize in general.
Even positive definite rank two forms like $3x^2+2xy+5y^2$ can't be diagonalized.
Inverting $2$ won't help things.</p>