bio  website  

location  
age  
visits  member for  4 years, 10 months 
seen  20 hours ago  
stats  profile views  11,968 
20h

comment 
Conjecture regarding closest point inside a discrete ball to a line
You mean "fleshed out," not "flushed out." 
Nov 17 
comment 
Are there nonreflexive abelian topological groups isomorphic to their second dual?
@paulgarrett: In the 3+ years since you made your comment above, did you ever find a reference to an example of such a Banach space? 
Nov 16 
comment 
Sum of two squares and implication of Bunyakovsky conjecture
I think you are misapplying Bouniakowsky's conjecture. It says a nonconstant polynomial in ${\mathbf Z}[x]$ has prime values infinitely often unless the polynomial is reducible in $\mathbf Z[x]$ or all of its values are divisible by a common prime number, and that second condition is weaker than saying the polynomial has content 1. For example, $x^2+x+2$ is irreducible with content 1 but all of its values on $\mathbf Z$ are even. 
Nov 16 
revised 
Sum of two squares and implication of Bunyakovsky conjecture
deleted 5 characters in body 
Nov 16 
revised 
Sum of two squares and implication of Bunyakovsky conjecture
added 16 characters in body 
Nov 15 
revised 
Trivial WeilChâtelet group
deleted 1 character in body 
Nov 14 
revised 
Two (other) rings…are they isomorphic?
added 1 character in body 
Nov 12 
comment 
Book about the history of mathematics for weather prediction
Those links are to descriptions of the book, one by the publisher and one by the authors. They are not book reviews in the usual sense. 
Nov 12 
revised 
Two rings…are they isomorphic?
deleted 1 character in body 
Nov 12 
comment 
Two rings…are they isomorphic?
Nick, out of curiosity, what was leading you to a different answer than what you expected? 
Nov 7 
comment 
CD  continuous development
The subject line ("CD  continuous development") could really be improved. 
Nov 4 
awarded  Guru 
Oct 31 
comment 
Determinant of a determinant
Another text reference for the theorem besides Bourbaki is Jacobson's Basic Algebra I (2nd ed.), Section 7.4. I don't have it in front of me, so I can't check if he uses induction. The paper by John Silvester that you link to has a proof by induction, which is not of direct interest to you, but what might be of interest is that in the last paragraph he mentions that he has seen an abstract version of the identity. Whatever the abstract version is might be the conceptual statement you seek (unless it's your corollary). 
Oct 29 
comment 
What are the “correct” conventions for defining Clifford algebras?
Have you asked Borcherds? 
Oct 26 
revised 
Counterexamples in Algebra?
added 276 characters in body 
Oct 25 
comment 
Who first noticed that Stirling numbers of the second kind count partitions?
Mathematical Reviews (the name for MathSciNet before it became a website) started in 1940, so it's not a surprise that anything from 1937 will predate (not just seem to predate) the written reviews you'll find on MathSciNet. It's also not a surprise that you'd like to avoid citing a journal on eugenics from the late 1930s. 
Oct 23 
comment 
How can I have a copy of this old paper by Frobenius?
Are you aware that the papers of Frobenius were gathered into his Collected Works in the late 1960s? It won't help with a translation, of course, but it means you can find all his papers bound together in these volumes in many university libraries. 
Oct 19 
comment 
Is the notation ${}^t g$ for the transpose of a linear transformation intended to be suggestive?
Frank, it's because the superscript is appearing on the left side, which looks wrong at first. At least this is the reasoning I made up when I first saw it. I never discussed it with anyone. 
Oct 19 
comment 
Is the notation ${}^t g$ for the transpose of a linear transformation intended to be suggestive?
I always regarded the placement of it to the left as a reminder that the transpose reverses the order of multiplication. Differential geometers write coordinates as $x^i$, so I never thought that it would be confused with an exponent when it's in the upper right (since the reader ought to know what the context is). 
Oct 18 
comment 
Number Theory over $\mathbb{F}_q [t]$, why is it important/interesting?
One way number theory in the function field case ($\mathbf F_q(t)$ and its finite extensions) can be applied back to more classical problems is in strong estimates on classical exponential sums. The best estimates are usually obtained from analogues of the Riemann hypothesis for zetafunctions or $L$functions in function fields. By the way, in your question, the analogue of $\mathbf R$ in the function field case is not the rational function field $\mathbf F_q(t)$ but Laurent series fields such as $\mathbf F_q((t))$ and $\mathbf F_q((1/t))$. 