bio | website | cwru.edu/artsci/phil/… |
---|---|---|
location | Case Western Reserve University | |
age | 63 | |
visits | member for | 3 years, 1 month |
seen | yesterday | |
stats | profile views | 1,561 |
Apr 10 |
awarded | Yearling |
Apr 2 |
comment |
Projective coordinates over a non UFD ring
Your explanation of why the terminology might have been chosen makes sense. But as you say it is not necessarily a good terminology. This is exactly what beginners often confuse with the correct definition of relative primeness as generating the unit ideal. |
Apr 2 |
accepted | Projective coordinates over a non UFD ring |
Apr 2 |
revised |
Projective coordinates over a non UFD ring
Added a possible answer. |
Apr 2 |
asked | Projective coordinates over a non UFD ring |
Mar 2 |
accepted | Authorship of Grothendieck universes |
Mar 1 |
comment |
Authorship of Grothendieck universes
Yes, I have edited the question to be clear I am talking about Grothendieck's first uses of the term, not about the origin of the term in set theory. |
Mar 1 |
revised |
Authorship of Grothendieck universes
Clarify that this is about Grothendieck's first uses of universes not the first occurrence of the idea in set theory. |
Mar 1 |
awarded | Necromancer |
Mar 1 |
awarded | Revival |
Mar 1 |
answered | Authorship of Grothendieck universes |
Feb 28 |
awarded | Popular Question |
Feb 20 |
awarded | Popular Question |
Feb 6 |
revised |
How important is Weil's decomposition theorem today?
added 4 characters in body |
Feb 6 |
revised |
How important is Weil's decomposition theorem today?
added 124 characters in body |
Feb 6 |
accepted | How important is Weil's decomposition theorem today? |
Feb 6 |
revised |
How important is Weil's decomposition theorem today?
Distinguished Weil's motivating statement from the theorem in his dissertation. |
Feb 6 |
comment |
How important is Weil's decomposition theorem today?
I will get Serre's book. For now, I think Kato, Kurakawa, and Saito Number Theory I do the same thing. They prove many special cases of Weil's theorem using specific inequalities on the simple notion of height for rational numbers. These inequalities measure aspects of what Weil in his autobiography called "almost prime to each other," I believe the version in Lang, or Bombieri and Gubler, is both a sharper estimate and uses a finer version of height, but am I right about that? |
Feb 5 |
comment |
How important is Weil's decomposition theorem today?
Yes, thanks for cites to uses of the theorem. But many graduate textbooks rely on heights and never mention the decomposition theorem. Even Serre in his Lectures on the Mordell-Weil Theorem never uses "decomposition" in this sense and I really do not think the lectures use any form of the theorem -- they use simpler arithmetic aspects of heights. It seems, so far, heights play a much larger unifying role than the decomposition theorem. I'd like to be wrong! I'd love to find some work stating and using the theorem as an explicit unifying tool for descent arguments. |
Feb 5 |
revised |
How important is Weil's decomposition theorem today?
Found a further discussion of it by Weil. |