Skip to main content

Timeline for K_2 of rings of algebraic integers

Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5

9 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jul 8, 2010 at 20:22 comment added Jim Humphreys Garland's theorem as originally stated appears in: A Finiteness Theorem for K2 of a Number Field, Ann. of Math. 94, No. 3 (1971), 534-548 (online via JSTOR). From the review on MathSciNet you can also find some but not all earlier/later related papers, including one by Tate in Invent. Math. and a Bourbaki talk by Bass. As other answers and comments here indicate, the subject hasn't reached a definitive state yet.
Jul 8, 2010 at 17:20 history edited Minhyong Kim CC BY-SA 2.5
added 308 characters in body
Jun 24, 2010 at 15:57 vote accept Andy Putman
Jun 24, 2010 at 10:35 comment added JBorger Good point. I agree. Nevertheless I thought Tate's theorem might be good to see for those not familiar with the subject.
Jun 24, 2010 at 9:57 comment added Minhyong Kim James: I agree that expressing $K_2$ in terms of Galois cohomology should be something 'explicit' in principle, but our current working knowledge of Galois cohomology seems primitive enough to make the utility of it entirely unclear. Recall that finiteness of $H^2(G_S, \mathbb{Z}_l(2)$, for example, uses the finiteness of $K_2$, even though one might have expected the application to run in the other direction.
Jun 24, 2010 at 9:51 history edited Minhyong Kim CC BY-SA 2.5
added 242 characters in body
Jun 24, 2010 at 9:26 comment added JBorger Oops. That should be $\mathbf{Z}_{\ell}(2)$ instead of $\mathbf{Z}_{\ell}$.
Jun 24, 2010 at 7:30 comment added JBorger Also, Tate has an explicit description of $K_2(F)$, where $F$ is a global field, in terms of Galois cohomology: $K_2(F)\cong\bigoplus_{\ell}H^2(G_F,\mathbf{Z}_{\ell})_{\mathrm{tor}}$, where $\ell$ runs over all primes distinct from the characteristic of $F$. See his paper "Relations between K_2 and Galois Cohomology", Inv Math 1976.
Jun 24, 2010 at 7:00 history answered Minhyong Kim CC BY-SA 2.5