Fuck, I love this, Marco! I'm definitely out of my depth. The only p-adic shit I've done is Fourier p-adic analysis. I'm dumb as fuck with p-adic shit. But that makes perfect sense. I only understood Tate's thesis (Fourier p-adic shit), by thinking of it as a non-archimedean number field. But I have trouble actually making heads or tails of this shit, lmao. I can read it, and understand it. But I'd never be able to prove anything about it. I can't do any exercises....
That makes a lot of sense though, Marco; thanks.
That makes a lot of sense though, Marco; thanks.