Skip to main content
MathOverflow

Return to Question

deleted 12 characters in body
Source Link
Adithya Chakravarthy
Adithya Chakravarthy
  • 1.9k
  • 6
  • 15

I'm currently learning about the Kubota–Leopoldt $p$-adic $L$-function and I'm noticing that many people view the Kubota–Leopoldt $p$-adic $L$-function as a measure as opposed to a $p$-adic analytic function or as a power series.

My question is: What is the motivation behind viewing a $p$-adic $L$-function as a measures? It seems quite bizarre anda bit unnatural, at least from a beginner's perspective. Why is it natural to view $p$-adic $L$-functions as measures (as opposed to, say, as a $p$-adic analytic function or as a power series), and what is the advantage of viewing them as measures?

I'm currently learning about the Kubota–Leopoldt $p$-adic $L$-function and I'm noticing that many people view the Kubota–Leopoldt $p$-adic $L$-function as a measure as opposed to a $p$-adic analytic function or as a power series.

My question is: What is the motivation behind viewing a $p$-adic $L$-function as a measures? It seems quite bizarre and unnatural, at least from a beginner's perspective. Why is it natural to view $p$-adic $L$-functions as measures (as opposed to, say, as a $p$-adic analytic function or as a power series), and what is the advantage of viewing them as measures?

I'm currently learning about the Kubota–Leopoldt $p$-adic $L$-function and I'm noticing that many people view the Kubota–Leopoldt $p$-adic $L$-function as a measure as opposed to a $p$-adic analytic function or as a power series.

My question is: What is the motivation behind viewing a $p$-adic $L$-function as a measures? It seems a bit unnatural, at least from a beginner's perspective. Why is it natural to view $p$-adic $L$-functions as measures (as opposed to, say, as a $p$-adic analytic function or as a power series), and what is the advantage of viewing them as measures?

Typo
Source Link
LSpice
LSpice
  • 12.9k
  • 4
  • 45
  • 69

I'm currently learning about the Kubota-LeopoldtKubota–Leopoldt $p$-adic $L$-function and I'm noticing that many people view the Kubota-LeopoldtKubota–Leopoldt $p$-adic $L$-function as a measure as opposed to a $p$-adic analytic function or as a power series.

My question is: What is the motivation behind viewing a $p$-adic $L$-function as a measures? It seems quite bizzarebizarre and unnatural, at least from a beginner's perspective. Why is it natural to view $p$-adic $L$-functions as measures (as opposed to, say, as a $p$-adic analytic function or as a power series), and what is the advantage of viewing them as measures?

I'm currently learning about the Kubota-Leopoldt $p$-adic $L$-function and I'm noticing that many people view the Kubota-Leopoldt $p$-adic $L$-function as a measure as opposed to a $p$-adic analytic function or as a power series.

My question is: What is the motivation behind viewing a $p$-adic $L$-function as a measures? It seems quite bizzare and unnatural, at least from a beginner's perspective. Why is it natural to view $p$-adic $L$-functions as measures (as opposed to, say, as a $p$-adic analytic function or as a power series), and what is the advantage of viewing them as measures?

I'm currently learning about the Kubota–Leopoldt $p$-adic $L$-function and I'm noticing that many people view the Kubota–Leopoldt $p$-adic $L$-function as a measure as opposed to a $p$-adic analytic function or as a power series.

My question is: What is the motivation behind viewing a $p$-adic $L$-function as a measures? It seems quite bizarre and unnatural, at least from a beginner's perspective. Why is it natural to view $p$-adic $L$-functions as measures (as opposed to, say, as a $p$-adic analytic function or as a power series), and what is the advantage of viewing them as measures?

Source Link
Adithya Chakravarthy
Adithya Chakravarthy
  • 1.9k
  • 6
  • 15

Why $p$-adic measures?

I'm currently learning about the Kubota-Leopoldt $p$-adic $L$-function and I'm noticing that many people view the Kubota-Leopoldt $p$-adic $L$-function as a measure as opposed to a $p$-adic analytic function or as a power series.

My question is: What is the motivation behind viewing a $p$-adic $L$-function as a measures? It seems quite bizzare and unnatural, at least from a beginner's perspective. Why is it natural to view $p$-adic $L$-functions as measures (as opposed to, say, as a $p$-adic analytic function or as a power series), and what is the advantage of viewing them as measures?