Skip to main content
6 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Apr 26, 2017 at 16:39 comment added Salvo Tringali I do very much like the style of Stein's proof: He makes full justice, I think, of the elegance and simplicity of Dirichlet's idea(s). But, of course, this is, in essence, no different than the proofs mentioned so far (with the exception of the one provided by @FilippoAlbertoEdoardo).
Apr 17, 2017 at 0:40 comment added Igor Rivin @KConrad Well, you are consistent :)
Apr 17, 2017 at 0:04 comment added KConrad Google tells me that I complained about this contradictory pair of terms before at mathoverflow.net/questions/239490/….
Apr 16, 2017 at 23:59 comment added KConrad I see section 4.3.1 is "inessential discriminant divisors." I never understood this phrase, which would make much more sense as essential discriminant divisors. In fact, Stein has another set of notes at wstein.org/129/ant/html/node29.html where he uses "essential discriminant divisor". In arxiv.org/pdf/1408.6251.pdf, Lagarias and Weiss write in a footnote on page 1 that prime divisors of the inessential discriminant divisor are the essential discriminant divisors. What nutty terminology!
Apr 16, 2017 at 23:56 history edited KConrad CC BY-SA 3.0
added 17 characters in body
Apr 16, 2017 at 23:37 history answered Igor Rivin CC BY-SA 3.0