bio | website | math.uga.edu/~pete |
---|---|---|
location | Athens, GA | |
age | 38 | |
visits | member for | 5 years, 6 months |
seen | 4 hours ago | |
stats | profile views | 27,809 |
Primary research interests: number theory, arithmetic geometry, Galois cohomology
Secondary research interests: field theory, commutative algebra, general topology, model theory, and various combinations thereof
I also have an enduring interest in mathematical exposition.
Apr 20 |
revised |
Proofs by induction
added 2 characters in body |
Apr 19 |
revised |
Proofs by induction
deleted 8 characters in body |
Apr 16 |
revised |
Fundamental Examples
deleted 41 characters in body |
Apr 15 |
awarded | Good Answer |
Apr 11 |
comment |
Proofs of the Chevalley-Warning Theorem
@darij: Currently it's 127 pages, and things are busy, so... |
Apr 6 |
awarded | Good Question |
Mar 23 |
awarded | Popular Question |
Mar 18 |
revised |
Proofs of the Chevalley-Warning Theorem
deleted 8 characters in body |
Mar 17 |
awarded | Nice Answer |
Mar 8 |
comment |
Upper bound for the number of integral points in a convex set
Theorem 7.2.1 in Han Duong's Minimal Volume K-point Lattice D-simplices (I googled for it) shows a roughly similar bound for lattice polyhedra. So the question seems to be plausible, at least. I would be interested to hear a bit more in the way of background... |
Feb 27 |
awarded | Nice Answer |
Feb 15 |
awarded | Good Answer |
Jan 26 |
awarded | Nice Answer |
Jan 25 |
awarded | Notable Question |
Jan 5 |
comment |
Companion to theoretical physics for working mathematicians
@Allen: Yes, but no Princeton Comprehensive Companion to Mathematics. (Perhaps I am taking that one word too seriously...) |
Dec 28 |
comment |
Companion to theoretical physics for working mathematicians
The idea that one book could be a comprehensive companion to any well-established academic field strikes me as a bit far-fetched. |
Dec 28 |
comment |
Splitting varieties of two Galois cohomology symbols
Maybe I didn't understand what you meant by a splitting variety for both symbols. I took that to mean a variety $X$ which for $L/k$ has an $L$-rational point iff both cohomology classes become trivial upon restriction to $L$. If so, $(X_{\alpha} \times X_{\beta})(L) \neq \varnothing \iff X_{\alpha}(L) \neq \varnothing$ and $X_{\beta}(L) \neq \varnothing$. There's no more to my answer than that. |
Dec 28 |
answered | Splitting varieties of two Galois cohomology symbols |
Dec 17 |
awarded | Popular Question |
Dec 14 |
awarded | Notable Question |