bio | website | math.berkeley.edu/~vivek |
---|---|---|
location | Berkeley, CA | |
age | 30 | |
visits | member for | 4 years, 1 month |
seen | 1 hour ago | |
stats | profile views | 3,028 |
Mar 31 |
awarded | Pundit |
Mar 19 |
revised |
The Markov trace via Bott-Samelson fibers?
added 6 characters in body |
Mar 19 |
revised |
The Markov trace via Bott-Samelson fibers?
added 12 characters in body |
Mar 19 |
revised |
The Markov trace via Bott-Samelson fibers?
added 33 characters in body |
Mar 19 |
asked | The Markov trace via Bott-Samelson fibers? |
Mar 18 |
awarded | Yearling |
Mar 5 |
awarded | Custodian |
Mar 5 |
reviewed | Approve suggested edit on adjoint orbit of (twisted) loop group |
Jan 14 |
comment |
Bounds for the milnor number of a hypersurface singularity
I do not think the method suggested by Will and Roy works, as shown by the answer of Dmitry below. Indeed, the Euler characteristic of a smooth hypersurface of degree d in $\mathbb{P}^n$ is $((1−d)^{n+1}−1)/d+ n + 1$, which is quite a bit less than $(d−1)^n$. The point is that the vanishing cycles can come either from the disappearance of $H^{mid}$ or the appearance of $H^{mid+1}$. Of course, $(d−1)^n$ really is an upper bound, since $\mu= \mathrm{dim} \,\mathbb{C}[x_1, \ldots, x_n]/(\partial f/ \partial x_i) \le (d-1)^n$ if finite by Bezout. |
Jan 10 |
comment |
On the generating functions for Euler characteristic of Hilbert schemes of points
In fact, a version of that equality holds even for 'universal' Euler characteristics, i.e. in the Grothendieck ring of varieties. See arxiv.org/pdf/math/0407204v1.pdf . |
Nov 27 |
awarded | Nice Question |
Oct 29 |
comment |
A gentle introduction to CFT
What's with the hate for this question? Regarding (1), there's a paper of Segal titled ``The definition of conformal field theory'' that might be relevant. As for (2), (3), (4), I would very much like an answer myself. I also think (2), (3), (4) are just reformulations / aspects of / clarifications of the same underlying question, so the complaint that there's too many questions here is just absurd. |
Aug 27 |
comment |
Iterated Milnor fibrations and Thom's a_f condition
maybe this arxiv.org/pdf/math/0605369.pdf will be helpful |
Aug 22 |
revised |
Reconstructing complexes of sheaves from their cohomology sheaves
added 2 characters in body |
Aug 22 |
asked | Reconstructing complexes of sheaves from their cohomology sheaves |
Jul 29 |
comment |
transverse intersection of Whitney stratifications
$R \cap S = \emptyset$ |
Jul 23 |
accepted | Intersection multiplicity in abelian varieties |
Jul 22 |
comment |
Intersection multiplicity in abelian varieties
@ulrich: connected components is all I meant, I'll have a look in Fulton. If you care to expand your comment into an answer I'd be grateful... |
Jul 22 |
comment |
Intersection multiplicity in abelian varieties
It's certainly true you can move to make the intersections isolated, which is why I believed the statement in the first place. But in trying to actually make a proof out of this: how do you know that each connected component before you moved can really be followed to a bunch of points along the move? |
Jul 22 |
revised |
Intersection multiplicity in abelian varieties
added 4 characters in body |