Thanks for the correction, Gareth. It was dumb of me to rely on my memory, which went no further than how much of the book I went through by the time I last saw it, many decades ago. --Dan
On Apr 23, 2015, at 1:27 AM, Gareth McCaughan <gareth.mccaughan@pobox.com> wrote:
On 22/04/2015 22:13, Dan Asimov wrote:
G.H. Hardy & E.M. Wright, An Introduction to the Theory of Numbers algebraic but not analytic
I'm not sure that's a very accurate description. E.g., on the analytic side they get as far as proving the Prime Number Theorem (but no further; e.g., no Dirichlet) and on the algebraic side they get as far as discussing the primes in quadratic fields with unique factorization (but no further; e.g., no ideal class group). It's always felt to me like quite an "analytic" book, which makes sense given Hardy's work.
But I'm not a number theorist; perhaps my idea of what counts as algebraic or analytic is distorted somehow.
-- g
_______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com https://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun