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


Is it correct that Langlands' combinatorial exercise (as he terms it in his paper "Shimura varieties and the Selberg trace formula") is to establish base change identities between orbital integrals of the group $G$ over a number field and twisted orbital integrals over some unramified extension? Or am I completely wrong?

I am trying to understand this part of the Langlands' paper "On the zeta-functions of some simple Shimura varieties" without much success...


share|cite|improve this question
I think so. My understanding is that he proves a fundamental lemma in the context of base-change. – Emerton Oct 22 '11 at 4:54

Your Answer


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

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.