Timeline for Learning Class Field Theory: Local or Global First?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 7, 2011 at 3:49 | comment | added | Alison Miller | (caveat: I've read neither book in its entirety, so this is based on only having read parts of both, and for different purposes) I find Neukirch to be less dense, more elegant, and generally a joy to read. Cassels and Frolich is lecture notes from an instructional conference, which means it has different chapters by different people, and is generally a bit rougher around the edges (in some ways this is a good thing of course). | |
| Apr 7, 2011 at 2:49 | comment | added | Brian | @Alison Miller: Could you please elaborate on what you said: "I learned the material out of Cassels and Frohlich mostly, but if I had to choose a book for someone interested in taking the local-first route I'd probably suggest Neukirch's /Algebraic Number Theory/ instead."? Why do you think Neukirch is a better choice? | |
| Aug 23, 2010 at 0:39 | comment | added | Alison Miller | Edited to fix the link. For further reference, in case the link changes again, it was to an maa.org review, written by Gouvea, of Nancy Childress's Class Field Theory. | |
| Aug 23, 2010 at 0:36 | history | edited | Alison Miller | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 27 characters in body
|
| Aug 23, 2010 at 0:15 | comment | added | KConrad | Alison, the link to a book review in your first paragraph is broken and it's not clear from your text what book it is, so only you can fix that. | |
| Nov 27, 2009 at 8:54 | history | answered | Alison Miller | CC BY-SA 2.5 |