Timeline for Is it known that certain extensions of the integers are UFDs?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 9, 2013 at 2:09 | comment | added | Qiaochu Yuan | In the last statement either "maximal" should be replaced with "prime" or we should add the fraction field to the inverse limit. | |
| Dec 4, 2013 at 20:27 | history | edited | Qiaochu Yuan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 268 characters in body
|
| Nov 28, 2013 at 13:57 | comment | added | Michael Barr | I think this answers my question. I guess that we can now invert all the rest of the primes but one. So we can take $p_0$ to be the prime we don't want to invert. I assume that if we take a UFD and invert all but one of the remaining primes, we still get a UFD. | |
| Nov 28, 2013 at 3:26 | history | answered | Qiaochu Yuan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |