5
$\begingroup$

This is a theorem of Garland. I had a look at the original paper which looks pretty complicated. I was wondering if the proof has been simplified over the years or if a different approach is nowadays available.

$\endgroup$
1
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Though I'm not at all a specialist in these matters, I wouldn't expect too much simplification: results of Garland and Tate have many connections to relatively deep theorems of number theory. Anyway, Garland's paper is A finiteness theorem for $K_2$ of a number field, Ann. of Math. (2) 94 (1971), 534–548. The Bourbaki Seminar report by Bass is freely available: numdam.org/numdam-bin/fitem?id=SB_1970-1971__13__233_0 $\endgroup$ Oct 25, 2014 at 19:16

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

For a calculation of $K^M_2(K)$ for $K = \mathbf{Q}$, see Lemmermeyer, Reciprocity Laws, p. 66, Theorem 2.30. (Note that the direct product should be a direct sum.)

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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