Nice to see you. I was one of your supervision students in Cambridge 1989 for Galois Theory, that was before you won the Fields Medal. One of our sessions went on for hours even though it was supposed to be only one hour. You have always been very passionate about maths and teaching maths.
the number of proofs (counting slightly different proofs to be entirely different proofs) is 314 dated by 2014, this is given in the 2015 edition of the same book.
Thanks for the tip. For those who want to see the list, I think it is in a different book "The Quadratic Reciprocity Law" by Oswald Baumgart rather than a new edition of the book mentioned in the lecture.
@@richarde.borcherds7998 Dear Sir, Franz Lemmermeyer has given references for more than 200 proofs of the QRL in this link [ www.rzuser.uni-heidelberg.de/~hb3/rchrono.html ]. Secondly my favourite proof of QRL is the one given at this link [ web.williams.edu/Mathematics/lg5/QR.pdf ], it is quite short and easy to remember.
Nice to see you. I was one of your supervision students in Cambridge 1989 for Galois Theory, that was before you won the Fields Medal. One of our sessions went on for hours even though it was supposed to be only one hour. You have always been very passionate about maths and teaching maths.
Boy you're lucky to have had such a teacher!! Although I consider myself lucky I can watch these lectures online (actually I prefer this format):)
the number of proofs (counting slightly different proofs to be entirely different proofs) is 314 dated by 2014, this is given in the 2015 edition of the same book.
Thanks for the tip. For those who want to see the list, I think it is in a different book "The Quadratic Reciprocity Law" by Oswald Baumgart rather than a new edition of the book mentioned in the lecture.
@@richarde.borcherds7998 Dear Sir, Franz Lemmermeyer has given references for more than 200 proofs of the QRL in this link [ www.rzuser.uni-heidelberg.de/~hb3/rchrono.html ]. Secondly my favourite proof of QRL is the one given at this link [ web.williams.edu/Mathematics/lg5/QR.pdf ], it is quite short and easy to remember.
It seems to me that around 8.30 when you prove tau=1+2alpha you use the equality 1+eps+eps^2+...+eps^p-1=0 without mentioning it?
What books would you recommend for number theory
Will you be making a video series for class field theory (with Galois cohomology)?
Not in the next two months, but possibly later.
YEEEEE