legende - teege二次互易性

IF 0.4 4区数学 Q4 MATHEMATICS

American Mathematical Monthly Pub Date : 2023-03-13 DOI:10.1080/00029890.2023.2184164

Mark B. Villarino

{"title":"legende - teege二次互易性","authors":"Mark B. Villarino","doi":"10.1080/00029890.2023.2184164","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Legendre published the first attempted proof of the law of Quadratic Reciprocity. In its final form (1797), however, it had a gap in the form of an unproven hypothesis. Some 125 years later, Herman Teege published the first rigorous proof of that hypothesis. Then, 48 years later, Kenneth Rogers published a second (but implicit) proof. These proofs elevated Legendre’s attempt to the list of complete proofs. No detailed exposition of these proofs appears in the literature. Our paper fills that gap.","PeriodicalId":7761,"journal":{"name":"American Mathematical Monthly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Legendre–Teege Quadratic Reciprocity\",\"authors\":\"Mark B. Villarino\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00029890.2023.2184164\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Legendre published the first attempted proof of the law of Quadratic Reciprocity. In its final form (1797), however, it had a gap in the form of an unproven hypothesis. Some 125 years later, Herman Teege published the first rigorous proof of that hypothesis. Then, 48 years later, Kenneth Rogers published a second (but implicit) proof. These proofs elevated Legendre’s attempt to the list of complete proofs. No detailed exposition of these proofs appears in the literature. Our paper fills that gap.\",\"PeriodicalId\":7761,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Mathematical Monthly\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Mathematical Monthly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"100\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00029890.2023.2184164\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"数学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MATHEMATICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Mathematical Monthly","FirstCategoryId":"100","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00029890.2023.2184164","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

勒让德发表了第一个关于二次互易律的尝试证明。然而，在它的最终形式(1797年)中，它有一个未被证实的假设形式的缺陷。大约125年后，赫尔曼·蒂格(Herman Teege)发表了对这一假设的第一个严格证明。48年后，肯尼斯·罗杰斯(Kenneth Rogers)发表了第二个(但隐含的)证明。这些证明将勒让德的尝试提升到了完整证明的行列。没有这些证明的详细说明出现在文献中。我们的论文填补了这一空白。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Legendre–Teege Quadratic Reciprocity

Abstract Legendre published the first attempted proof of the law of Quadratic Reciprocity. In its final form (1797), however, it had a gap in the form of an unproven hypothesis. Some 125 years later, Herman Teege published the first rigorous proof of that hypothesis. Then, 48 years later, Kenneth Rogers published a second (but implicit) proof. These proofs elevated Legendre’s attempt to the list of complete proofs. No detailed exposition of these proofs appears in the literature. Our paper fills that gap.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

American Mathematical Monthly Mathematics-General Mathematics

CiteScore

0.80

自引率

20.00%

发文量

127

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： The Monthly''s readers expect a high standard of exposition; they look for articles that inform, stimulate, challenge, enlighten, and even entertain. Monthly articles are meant to be read, enjoyed, and discussed, rather than just archived. Articles may be expositions of old or new results, historical or biographical essays, speculations or definitive treatments, broad developments, or explorations of a single application. Novelty and generality are far less important than clarity of exposition and broad appeal. Appropriate figures, diagrams, and photographs are encouraged. Notes are short, sharply focused, and possibly informal. They are often gems that provide a new proof of an old theorem, a novel presentation of a familiar theme, or a lively discussion of a single issue. Abstracts for articles or notes should entice the prospective reader into exploring the subject of the paper and should make it clear to the reader why this paper is interesting and important. The abstract should highlight the concepts of the paper rather than summarize the mechanics. The abstract is the first impression of the paper, not a technical summary of the paper. Excessive use of notation is discouraged as it can limit the interest of the broad readership of the MAA, and can limit search-ability of the article.