Revision as of 10:49, 21 March 2015 edit D.Lazard (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 35,639 edits →References: {{algebra-stub}} see talk page for reasons ← Previous edit		Revision as of 15:50, 27 January 2016 edit undo 188.25.79.149 (talk) →References: I'm not sure what's the point of this obscure/dead reference since this notion is found in 10,000+ books no doubt. Next edit →
Line 23: ==References== {{reflist}} * Nathanael Leedom Ackerman (2006) [http://math.berkeley.edu/~nate/teaching/UPenn/2006/fall/math_371/lectures/week_3/lecture_4/lecture_4.pdf Lecture notes Math 371],{{dead link\|date=October 2014}} Positive definite bilinear form is definition 0.5.0.7, weblink from [[University of California, Berkeley]]. * {{cite book \| last=Kitaoka \| first=Yoshiyuki \| title=Arithmetic of quadratic forms \| series=Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics \| volume=106 \| publisher=Cambridge University Press \| year=1993 \| isbn=0-521-40475-4 \| zbl=0785.11021 }} * {{Lang Algebra \| edition=3r2004\|page=578}}

Definite quadratic form: Difference between revisions