bio | website | plusepsilon.de |
---|---|---|

location | Uni Hamburg | |

age | 29 | |

visits | member for | 4 years, 1 month |

seen | Sep 25 at 13:24 | |

stats | profile views | 8,354 |

Sep 19 |
comment |
Are there any simple, interesting consequences to motivate the local Langlands correspondence?
@PaulSiegel: I have edited the question. I was probably thinking "global understanding requires local understanding". That is not necessarily so, I guess. |

Jun 30 |
comment |
Eisenstein series over a definite division algebra
Ah okay, I see my mistake. I was thinking $GL(1)$ over a division algebra, you are considering $GL(2)$. Moeglin-Waldspurger do not consider this setting in their book? |

Jun 27 |
comment |
Eisenstein series over a definite division algebra
Please help me to understand what the cusp is. I recall that quaternion division algebras give rise to compact quotients, hence no cusps and Eisenstein series. The trace formula becomes simple and one gets the Jacquet-Langlands correspondence with forms with at least two square-integrable components. |

Jun 19 |
comment |
Complex zeros of $\zeta'(s)/\zeta(s) + \zeta'(1-s)/\zeta(1-s) $ = simpler expression (except at zeta zeros)
How do cancel the Euler products? Seems like you only got the $\Gamma$ factor. |

Jun 19 |
comment |
Complex zeros of $\zeta'(s)/\zeta(s) + \zeta'(1-s)/\zeta(1-s) $ = simpler expression (except at zeta zeros)
$\xi(s) = \xi(1-s)$, isn't it? What is your definition of $\xi$? |

Jun 14 |
comment |
Are there any simple, interesting consequences to motivate the local Langlands correspondence?
Is there a local version of the Taniyama-Shimura conjecture? Also it proves the Ramanujan conjecture in the global setting, but this does not apply to the local steting at all, where actually non-tempered things play a role. |

Jun 11 |
comment |
Analytic criteria for the support of the Plancherel measure for SL(2,Qp), spherical functions
Characteristic functions are not smooth. Growth considerations are pretty analytic to me. For any thing else, there are not that many analytic differences between the characters. It's like $x \mapsto e^{sx}$ for $s$ varying and $s$ being imaginary means temperedness. |

Jun 10 |
comment |
Spherical functions for sl(2,Q_p)
I gave the formula for the distribution. It is general. If you want to find a function on $G$ corresponding to this, I can't tell where to look for explicit computations. My feeling is that finding some useful computational analogy can only done to some extent. $P$-adic Gamma factors do not look like real or complex Gamma-functions. |

Jun 10 |
comment |
Spherical functions for sl(2,Q_p)
Being in the left regular correspond to being tempered, so you will not get the trivial representation nor the non-tempered principal series. But it does not matter, my computation assume $\mu$ general, not necessarily unitary. You probably means character seen as a function, which is locally integrable - not as a distribution. Yes you can do a similiar things whether as long as you assume admissible. |

Jun 2 |
comment |
Spherical functions for sl(2,Q_p)
Being type I and having spherical functions are different things. Please clarify your question. |

May 20 |
comment |
surjective homomorphism with compact kernel (Milne's note on Shimura varieties)
Please define the notation. |

May 20 |
comment |
Fourier series of functions on compact groups
If you use the framework of Hilbert's 5th problem, you can generalize it to the locally compact version, see chapter 6 of my Phd Thesis. |

May 20 |
comment |
Fourier series of functions on compact groups
Harish-Chandra (1966), "Discrete series for semisimple Lie groups. II. Explicit determination of the characters", |

May 13 |
comment |
Decomposition of $L^2(\Gamma \backslash G)$
Multiplicity one is known not to hold for SL(n), so no simplicity of the eigenvalues. It is a reasonable conjecture to assume that given a lattice, the multiplicity is bounded by a constant depending on the lattice and the weights. |

May 12 |
comment |
Constant terms of Eisenstein series and Gindikin-Karpelevich formula
Did you check Moeglin-Waldspurger's book on Eisenstein series? |

Apr 30 |
comment |
Has universality been definitely established for the whole Selberg class?
authors... I d send a joint email at all of them in this case. |

Apr 30 |
comment |
Has universality been definitely established for the whole Selberg class?
Did you ask the author via email? |

Apr 30 |
comment |
Has universality been definitely established for the whole Selberg class?
Please add references. |

Apr 30 |
comment |
Current Status on Langlands Program
@Emerton: I thought that stabilization solves the issue that distinct conjugacy classen in $G(F)$ become conjugated in $G(\overline{F})$. This does not seem to happen for $GL(n)$, hence I thought the trace formula on $GL(n)$ is stable by definition. That's all what I meant to say. |

Apr 17 |
comment |
Can $T$ act trivial in a repn of SL$_2(\mathbb{Z}_N)$?
Be careful that $p$ is much easier than $p^k$. I actually don't understand your proof even for the case $p$. |