Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
Drexel University or The Math Forum.
|
|
|
|
Re: Tautologies, math, and Wiles's work
Posted:
Jun 20, 2003 6:08 PM
|
|
nevermind. let's start another item!
tchow@lsa.umich.edu wrote in message news:<3ef34a55$0$3963$b45e6eb0@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu>...
> But the fault lies not with Wiles or other "establishment mathematicians,"
> since they haven't claimed that elliptic curves and modular forms are the
> same thing.
> That's all correct, except that the part about "4 descriptors between
> them" is not precise. The "4 descriptors" are properties of *Galois
> representations*, not of elliptic curves or modular forms per se. To
> an elliptic curve one can associate a Galois representation, and to a
> modular form one can associate a Galois representation. Then we can
> talk about comparing Galois representations to each other. One does
> not directly identify an elliptic curve with a modular form anywhere.
> I don't follow you here. If I want to prove that every integer is
> an algebraic integer, how do I do this without mentioning algebraic
> integers?
--les ducs d'Enron!
http://quincy4board.homestead.com/
Funny.html (schoolboard stuffin')
|
|
|
|
