Timeline for Tate's thesis and Riemann-Roch - $\mathrm{GL}_n$ or twisted version?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 6 at 4:40 | history | edited | Seewoo Lee | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 39 characters in body
|
| Feb 5 at 20:26 | comment | added | paul garrett | Or, perhaps it's that Poisson summation is Riemann-Roch? (In the function-field case.) | |
| Feb 5 at 19:53 | history | edited | Seewoo Lee | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 5 characters in body
|
| Feb 5 at 19:53 | comment | added | Seewoo Lee | @WillSawin Thanks, I totally agree with you that the wording is not correct - I may misheard in the past. | |
| Feb 5 at 19:25 | comment | added | Will Sawin | Surely it's not right to say Tate's thesis is the Riemann-Roch theorem but Tate's thesis gives the Riemann-Roch theorem? From Riemann-Roch we can derive functional equations of L-functions of everywhere unramified idele class group characters but there is the ramified case as well. | |
| Feb 5 at 19:14 | history | edited | Seewoo Lee | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 91 characters in body
|
| Feb 5 at 18:58 | history | asked | Seewoo Lee | CC BY-SA 4.0 |