808 reputation
1311
bio website
location
age
visits member for 1 year, 11 months
seen Apr 11 at 13:23

I am primarily interested in C*-algebras, functional analysis, harmonic analysis and related areas.

Some of my previous and current works have some overlaps with one or more other areas such as K-theory, KK-theory, cyclic cohomology, Galois theory, group theory, number theory, deformation quantization.


Apr
6
comment Is the space of *-homomorphisms between two $C^*$-algebras locally path connected
It is not a counterexample for the question, because any discrete space is locally path connected.
Apr
6
comment Is the space of *-homomorphisms between two $C^*$-algebras locally path connected
There is an ambiguity in your question. In your question $\epsilon$ is independent of $f$ and $G$. But the locally path connected means for every homomorphism $f$, there is an $\epsilon>0$ such that if $g$ is a homomorphism and $d(f,g)<\epsilon$, then there is a continuous homotopy between $f$ and $g$. If this second version is what you mean, you should edit your question.
Apr
6
comment Lattices in general totally disconnected locally compact groups
@HJRW: Yes, you are right, unless the other summand is a discrete group.
Apr
5
comment Lattices in general totally disconnected locally compact groups
I am wondering can one reduce simplicity with the condition that there is no open normal subgroup in the TDLC group? Is it still an interesting (and non-trivial) question to look for TDLC groups without lattices?
Apr
4
comment Lattices in general totally disconnected locally compact groups
@Misha: Is this as much as I can get?
Apr
4
asked Lattices in general totally disconnected locally compact groups
Mar
18
comment Quoting mathreviews
One possible solution would be as follows: If the proof is short, you can repeat the proof and add a sentence like "I learned this proof from the review of the paper X appeared in Mathematical Review MR:number", by "the name of the reviewer". I suppose you don't need to cite it like a journal paper.
Feb
28
comment Groups whose finite index subgroups are isomorphic
@AliTaghavi: I haven't thought about it yet. This question came to my mind from a purely algebraic point of view related to $\mathbb{Z}$.
Feb
27
comment Groups whose finite index subgroups are isomorphic
@BenjaminSteinberg: I agree. But I was a little uncertain about the question and I thought there might be a very simple answer which describes all cases.
Feb
27
comment Groups whose finite index subgroups are isomorphic
@Yves: I do not see how your example works. What is the role of variable $u$? Could you please elaborate a little bit?
Feb
27
revised Groups whose finite index subgroups are isomorphic
added 45 characters in body
Feb
27
comment Groups whose finite index subgroups are isomorphic
@YvesCornulier: Even if we omit the word "proper", still Sasha's comment is valid and we have to exclude simple groups.
Feb
27
revised Groups whose finite index subgroups are isomorphic
Excluded an easy case.
Feb
27
comment Groups whose finite index subgroups are isomorphic
@SashaAnan'in: Yes indeed they satisfy the assumption too. Let me modify the question to discard this class.
Feb
27
asked Groups whose finite index subgroups are isomorphic
Feb
12
answered Realisation of noncommutative torus
Feb
11
comment Hochschild and cyclic cohomology of commutative algebra?
@user36075: Did you consult with Loday's book?
Feb
3
accepted Does every nearly normal subgroup contain a normal subgroup?
Feb
3
comment Does every nearly normal subgroup contain a normal subgroup?
@HJRW: Thanks for explanations.
Feb
3
comment Does every nearly normal subgroup contain a normal subgroup?
@HJRW: Thanks for your comment. But I am not a group theorist and I still don't understand: Where did you use the assumption that $H$ is finitely generated? And, is $L$ finite index in $H$? And, why is $L$ non-trivial?