Talk:Geometry of numbers

arithmogeometry?

Is this arithmogeometry? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.6.205.201 (talk) 22:09, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1910

Minkowski died in 1909. Any date such as 1910 seems to refer to a posthumous publication. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.152.162.31 (talk) 18:24, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Jahrbuch über die Fortschritte der Mathematik review at JFM 41.0239.03 describes it as "Manuskript im Nachlasse", i.e. posthumous. Deltahedron (talk) 18:38, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kolmogorov's result

"Minkowski's theorem was generalized to topological vector spaces by Kolmogorov, whose theorem states that the symmetric convex sets that are closed and bounded generate the topology of a Banach space.[6]"

The geometry of numbers explores the interplay between specific bodies (e.g., spheres), or classes of bodies (e.g., convex), and lattices. To me this result has no obvious connection with the geometry of numbers, much less is it a generalization. I have published several papers in the area. I'd suggest the assertion should be removed, or at the very least be justified better. Be sure to include the lattice generalization aspect. Symmetry and convexity are ubiquitous in math, so their presence isn't adequate. Getthebasin (talk) 21:15, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What about rings of algebraic integers???

The first two sentences of the introductory paragraph are as follows:

"Geometry of numbers is the part of number theory which uses geometry for the study of algebraic numbers. Typically, a ring of algebraic integers is viewed as a lattice in $\mathbb {R} ^{n},$ and the study of these lattices provides fundamental information on algebraic numbers."

Yet the rest of the article says nothing at all about algebraic integers. I hope someone knowledgeable about this subject can fill in some details. 2601:200:C000:1A0:F44B:1651:20B7:7463 (talk) 17:03, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]