MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I'm rereading my notes and they mention that $K_{23}(\mathbb Z) = \mathbb Z/(65520)$

This looks like a good point to stop and ask whether there is any explanation for this $K$-group of integers (23 is just an arbitrary fixed number for this purpose). By "explanation" I mean a reasoning that would allow to find at least some properties of this group in advance of computing it or some intuition behind the result.

Here's one thing I already know:

  • non-torsion part of $K(\mathbb Z)$ is $\mathbb Z$ in degrees $0,5,9,13,\dots\ $ so $K_{23}(\mathbb Z)$ is pure torsion

Wikipedia says that "The torsion subgroups of $K_{2i+1}(\mathbb Z)$ ... have recently been determined."

Update: I learned from the article by Soule how this number $=2 * 12 * 2730 $ where 2730 is the denominator of 12-th Bernoulli number. But the question stands.

share|cite|improve this question
Do you have a link to a list of the first however many K-groups of Z? I'm sure I've seen one somewhere, but I don't remember where. – Harrison Brown Dec 31 '09 at 1:08
My guess is that this is because of its appearance in . – Qiaochu Yuan Dec 31 '09 at 1:12
#Harrison, I didn't find it either but I checked with the known answer for $K_i(\mathbb Z)$. @Qiaochu: this is amazing! Do you think you could post on the possible connection? – Ilya Nikokoshev Dec 31 '09 at 1:20
The connection with the Bernoulli numbers is well-known for K_n(Z) when n = 2 (mod 4), and I don't think it's a coincidence here either. I found an interesting-looking article by Weibel: . In general, though, I think you might be asking too much if you want "intuition," considering how notoriously strange homotopy-type stuff can be. – Harrison Brown Dec 31 '09 at 1:23
Please do post answers even if they are one-liners as above! It will be easier to read and you'll get upvotes. – Ilya Nikokoshev Dec 31 '09 at 1:28

More generally, if $F$ is a number field with ring of integers $\mathfrak{o}$, and $\zeta_F^\ast(m)$ is the first nonzero coefficient in the Taylor expansion of $\zeta_F$ at $m$, then Lichtenbaum (and Quillen) conjectured that $|\zeta_F^\ast(1-i)|=\frac{\# K_{2i-2}(\mathfrak{o})_{\text{tors}}}{\# K_{2i-1}(\mathfrak{o})_{\text{tors}}}$, times a regulator and some power of 2 (which I believe is not understood in general, although some progress was made on this in Ion Rada's PhD thesis). Hence, odd $K$ groups are related to the denominators of the Bernoulli numbers, and the even ones are related to the numerators. Also, not much cancellation occurs; I think the two $K$-groups can only share factors of 2.

The Voevodsky-Rost theorem might prove the Lichtenbaum conjecture, but I haven't seen anyone come out and say definitely that this is the case.

I don't have much intuition for this, except that the $K$-groups seem to be objects that like to map into étale cohomology groups. In this paper (link to MathSciNet), Soulé constructs Chern class maps from certain $K$-groups to étale cohomology groups. Furthermore, these maps frequently have small (or trivial) kernels and cokernels. I suppose the idea, then, is that $K$-theory is supposed to be a slightly better behaved version of étale cohomology, at least for the purpose of understanding zeta functions.

The rank of $K$-groups of rings of integers was computed by Quillen in the early 70's: it's rank 1 in dimension 0, rank $r_1+r_2-1$ in dimension 1 (Dirichlet's unit theorem), rank 0 in even dimensions $>0$, rank $r_1+r_2$ in dimensions $1\pmod 4$ except 1, and rank $r_2$ in dimensions $3\pmod 4$.

share|cite|improve this answer
Shouldn't there be a regulator factor in the Lichtenbaum conjecture formula (even when F is totally real)? – Reid Barton Dec 31 '09 at 6:04
Thanks. I fixed it. – Simon Dec 31 '09 at 15:14
Shouldn't the left hand side of the formula be the absolute value of the leading coefficient of the Taylor series centered at 1-i? – Bjorn Poonen Dec 31 '09 at 19:04
And on the right hand side, shouldn't the K-groups be replaced by their torsion subgroups? – Bjorn Poonen Dec 31 '09 at 19:06
Finally, there is more than one abelian group of order 65520, so the formula by itself does not fully answer Ilya's question about why it is Z/65520Z. – Bjorn Poonen Dec 31 '09 at 19:13

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.