Witt ring of field

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
1
down vote

favorite
1












Why $W(C)$ is isometric to $mathbbZ_2$ and $W(R)=mathbbZ$ how to get this explicitly? I know we can count $mathbbC$ as even dimensional space over $mathbbR$ so hyperbolic space hence it is $mathbbZ_2$ but I can't get why it is true explicitly? Also for algebraically closed field it is isomorphic to $mathbbZ_2$ please explain this also.




linear-algebra abstract-algebra group-theory




share|cite|improve this question


























    up vote
    1
    down vote

    favorite
    1












    Why $W(C)$ is isometric to $mathbbZ_2$ and $W(R)=mathbbZ$ how to get this explicitly? I know we can count $mathbbC$ as even dimensional space over $mathbbR$ so hyperbolic space hence it is $mathbbZ_2$ but I can't get why it is true explicitly? Also for algebraically closed field it is isomorphic to $mathbbZ_2$ please explain this also.




    linear-algebra abstract-algebra group-theory




    share|cite|improve this question
























      up vote
      1
      down vote

      favorite
      1









      up vote
      1
      down vote

      favorite
      1






      1





      Why $W(C)$ is isometric to $mathbbZ_2$ and $W(R)=mathbbZ$ how to get this explicitly? I know we can count $mathbbC$ as even dimensional space over $mathbbR$ so hyperbolic space hence it is $mathbbZ_2$ but I can't get why it is true explicitly? Also for algebraically closed field it is isomorphic to $mathbbZ_2$ please explain this also.




      linear-algebra abstract-algebra group-theory




      share|cite|improve this question














      Why $W(C)$ is isometric to $mathbbZ_2$ and $W(R)=mathbbZ$ how to get this explicitly? I know we can count $mathbbC$ as even dimensional space over $mathbbR$ so hyperbolic space hence it is $mathbbZ_2$ but I can't get why it is true explicitly? Also for algebraically closed field it is isomorphic to $mathbbZ_2$ please explain this also.





      linear-algebra abstract-algebra group-theory





      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Aug 16 at 8:39









      Bernard

      111k635103




      111k635103










      asked Aug 16 at 8:26









      Ninja hatori

      149113




      149113




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          0
          down vote













          Calculations of the Witt ring are way too demanding for simple Math Stackexchange answer. I'll give you hints and resources.



          For a field $k$ of $textchar(k)neq 2$ the following are equivalent:



          • $k$ does not admit quadratic field extension

          • $W(k)simeqmathbbZ_2$

          You can find the proof in the following paper (Proposition 11):



          https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/a1c5/a6eb6f12a8dfd0f1f01cf57d6b4fa4233beb.pdf



          Now since algebraically closed fields have no finite extensions then in particular they don't have quadratic field extensions so their Witt ring is $mathbbZ_2$.



          For reals $mathbbR$ read the same paper, Proposition 26. I actually encourage you to read the whole paper.






          share|cite|improve this answer






















          • math.stackexchange.com/questions/2888950/…
            – Ninja hatori
            Aug 22 at 11:19










          • paper doesn't included proof for most of theorems.
            – Ninja hatori
            Aug 22 at 11:19










          Your Answer




          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          );
          );
          , "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: false,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );








           

          draft saved


          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2884545%2fwitt-ring-of-field%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest

















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes








          up vote
          0
          down vote













          Calculations of the Witt ring are way too demanding for simple Math Stackexchange answer. I'll give you hints and resources.



          For a field $k$ of $textchar(k)neq 2$ the following are equivalent:



          • $k$ does not admit quadratic field extension

          • $W(k)simeqmathbbZ_2$

          You can find the proof in the following paper (Proposition 11):



          https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/a1c5/a6eb6f12a8dfd0f1f01cf57d6b4fa4233beb.pdf



          Now since algebraically closed fields have no finite extensions then in particular they don't have quadratic field extensions so their Witt ring is $mathbbZ_2$.



          For reals $mathbbR$ read the same paper, Proposition 26. I actually encourage you to read the whole paper.






          share|cite|improve this answer






















          • math.stackexchange.com/questions/2888950/…
            – Ninja hatori
            Aug 22 at 11:19










          • paper doesn't included proof for most of theorems.
            – Ninja hatori
            Aug 22 at 11:19














          up vote
          0
          down vote













          Calculations of the Witt ring are way too demanding for simple Math Stackexchange answer. I'll give you hints and resources.



          For a field $k$ of $textchar(k)neq 2$ the following are equivalent:



          • $k$ does not admit quadratic field extension

          • $W(k)simeqmathbbZ_2$

          You can find the proof in the following paper (Proposition 11):



          https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/a1c5/a6eb6f12a8dfd0f1f01cf57d6b4fa4233beb.pdf



          Now since algebraically closed fields have no finite extensions then in particular they don't have quadratic field extensions so their Witt ring is $mathbbZ_2$.



          For reals $mathbbR$ read the same paper, Proposition 26. I actually encourage you to read the whole paper.






          share|cite|improve this answer






















          • math.stackexchange.com/questions/2888950/…
            – Ninja hatori
            Aug 22 at 11:19










          • paper doesn't included proof for most of theorems.
            – Ninja hatori
            Aug 22 at 11:19












          up vote
          0
          down vote










          up vote
          0
          down vote









          Calculations of the Witt ring are way too demanding for simple Math Stackexchange answer. I'll give you hints and resources.



          For a field $k$ of $textchar(k)neq 2$ the following are equivalent:



          • $k$ does not admit quadratic field extension

          • $W(k)simeqmathbbZ_2$

          You can find the proof in the following paper (Proposition 11):



          https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/a1c5/a6eb6f12a8dfd0f1f01cf57d6b4fa4233beb.pdf



          Now since algebraically closed fields have no finite extensions then in particular they don't have quadratic field extensions so their Witt ring is $mathbbZ_2$.



          For reals $mathbbR$ read the same paper, Proposition 26. I actually encourage you to read the whole paper.






          share|cite|improve this answer














          Calculations of the Witt ring are way too demanding for simple Math Stackexchange answer. I'll give you hints and resources.



          For a field $k$ of $textchar(k)neq 2$ the following are equivalent:



          • $k$ does not admit quadratic field extension

          • $W(k)simeqmathbbZ_2$

          You can find the proof in the following paper (Proposition 11):



          https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/a1c5/a6eb6f12a8dfd0f1f01cf57d6b4fa4233beb.pdf



          Now since algebraically closed fields have no finite extensions then in particular they don't have quadratic field extensions so their Witt ring is $mathbbZ_2$.



          For reals $mathbbR$ read the same paper, Proposition 26. I actually encourage you to read the whole paper.







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Aug 17 at 9:11

























          answered Aug 17 at 9:05









          freakish

          8,6971524




          8,6971524











          • math.stackexchange.com/questions/2888950/…
            – Ninja hatori
            Aug 22 at 11:19










          • paper doesn't included proof for most of theorems.
            – Ninja hatori
            Aug 22 at 11:19
















          • math.stackexchange.com/questions/2888950/…
            – Ninja hatori
            Aug 22 at 11:19










          • paper doesn't included proof for most of theorems.
            – Ninja hatori
            Aug 22 at 11:19















          math.stackexchange.com/questions/2888950/…
          – Ninja hatori
          Aug 22 at 11:19




          math.stackexchange.com/questions/2888950/…
          – Ninja hatori
          Aug 22 at 11:19












          paper doesn't included proof for most of theorems.
          – Ninja hatori
          Aug 22 at 11:19




          paper doesn't included proof for most of theorems.
          – Ninja hatori
          Aug 22 at 11:19












           

          draft saved


          draft discarded


























           


          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2884545%2fwitt-ring-of-field%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest
































































          -

          這個網誌中的熱門文章

          Is there any way to eliminate the singular point to solve this integral by hand or by approximations?

          圖片
          Clash Royale CLAN TAG #URR8PPP up vote 0 down vote favorite 1 $$int_0^1 (1+(x^-p-1)^1-p)^frac1pdx, pin mathbbR, pge 1$$ I find that $x=0,1$ are singular points(discontinuous points of this integral), is there a way to eliminate those singular points to make sure that this integral can be calculated by hand or by Taylor approximations. In either cases, what are those steps of calculating the integral? calculus real-analysis analysis approximation share | cite | improve this question edited Sep 11 at 5:07 asked Sep 11 at 4:48 Mclalalala 126 8 1 What is $p$? Please give more information to make it complete. – xbh Sep 11 at 5:02 @xbh already fixed it, thanks for reminding. – Mclalalala Sep 11 at 5:10 Seems that $0$ is not singular here… [I might compute wrong] – xbh Sep 11 at 5:30 @xbh can you show me how to get the close formula for the integral above? – Mclalalala Sep 11 at 5:33
          閱讀完整內容

          Why am i infinitely getting the same tweet with the Twitter Search API?

          圖片
          up vote 0 down vote favorite My code workes perfectly for other queries, but for one query I am infinitely getting the same tweet. I can't understand what the problem is. API call: query='Allergic asthma OR Nonallergic asthma OR Occupational asthma OR EIB OR Exercise-induced bronchoconstriction OR Nocturnal asthma OR Cough-variant asthma' new_tweets = api.search(q=searchQuery, count=100, since_id=since_id, lang='en',tweet_mode='extended') if not new_tweets: print("No more tweets found") break for tweet in new_tweets: if True: print(jsonpickle.encode(tweet._json, unpicklable=False)) my_file = open('searchTweets.txt','a') my_file.write(jsonpickle.encode(tweet._json, unpicklable=False)+'n') my_file.close() else: continue Output in file: https://pastebin.com/JmRCsTeE These are the JSONs of the same Tweet. Other queries that work: Breast cancer OR Prostate cancer OR Colon cancer OR Lung cancer Type 2 dia
          閱讀完整內容

          Carbon dioxide

          圖片
          "CO2" redirects here. For other uses, see CO2 (disambiguation). Carbon dioxide Names Other names Carbonic acid gas Carbonic anhydride Carbonic oxide Carbon oxide Carbon(IV) oxide Dry ice (solid phase) Identifiers CAS Number 124-38-9   Y 3D model (JSmol) Interactive image Interactive image 3DMet B01131 Beilstein Reference 1900390 ChEBI CHEBI:16526   Y ChEMBL ChEMBL1231871   N ChemSpider 274   Y ECHA InfoCard 100.004.271 EC Number 204-696-9 E number E290 (preservatives) Gmelin Reference 989 KEGG D00004   Y MeSH Carbon+dioxide PubChem CID 280 RTECS number FF6400000 UNII 142M471B3J   Y UN number 1013 (gas), 1845 (solid) InChI InChI=1S/CO2/c2-1-3   Y Key: CURLTUGMZLYLDI-UHFFFAOYSA-N   Y InChI=1/CO2/c2-1-3 Key: CURLTUGMZLYLDI-UHFFFAOYAO SMILES O=C=O C(=O)=O Properties Chemical formula C O 2 Molar mass 44.01 g·mol −1 Appearance Colorless gas Odor Low concentrations: none High concentrations: sharp; acidic [1] Density 1562 kg/m 3 (solid at 1 atm and −78.5 °C) 1101 kg/m 3 (liquid at
          閱讀完整內容