Qfwfq
|
Registered User
|
(formerly user "unknowngoogle", and for a very short time "red herring" but that was a red herring)
|
|
1d |
comment |
Hartogs Theorem and Canonical Bundles (continued) See: Fritzsche, Grauert, From holomorphic functions to complex manifolds, Theorem 6.12. |
|
1d |
comment |
Hartogs Theorem and Canonical Bundles Hartogs' theorem is always misattributed: the one in the OP is Riemann's extension theorem (extension through analytic subsets of codimension $\geq 2$). Hartogs' is about extending through compact subsets. |
|
2d |
comment |
Why is Set, and not Rel, so ubiquitous in mathematics? @Wlodzimierz Holsztynski: is the historical reconstruction you hint at based on some objective documents, or is it just a conjecture? |
|
2d |
comment |
Why is Set, and not Rel, so ubiquitous in mathematics? @mbsq: (continued) Codomain is very important in the everyday treatement of functions, otherwise you wouldn't be able to conveniently express "surjectivity": we want to be able to neatly express -say- that an operator between Hilbert spaces has dense range (note that the range may not be a complete inner product space) but is not surjective. |
|
2d |
comment |
Why is Set, and not Rel, so ubiquitous in mathematics? @mbsq: I think the identification of functions with their graphs, which is prevalent in Logic I presume for practical reasons (you just say $f\subseteq g$ to express that "$g$ is an extension of $f$"), doesn't reflect the mathematical practice, in which a function is actually a triple $(f,\mathrm{dom}(f),\mathrm{cod}(f))$. |
|
May 11 |
revised |
para-complex structure deleted 4 characters in body |
|
May 8 |
comment |
Functional equations The question would be more interesting if we knew what motivates it... |
|
Apr 25 |
revised |
Is there an algebra for divergent series summation operators? deleted 1 characters in body |
|
Apr 25 |
comment |
Does Physics need non-analytic smooth functions? @Zsbán: I don't agree, as this is intended to be a mathematical question (a question in mathematical physics, if you want). +1 for the xkcd quote! ;) |
|
Apr 24 |
awarded | ● Favorite Question |
|
Apr 24 |
awarded | ● Notable Question |
|
Apr 4 |
comment |
Infinite dimensional algebraic geometry If I remember correctly, in the book "Infinite Grassmannians and moduli spaces of G-bundles" by S.Kumar there's a chapter or at least a paragraph on Ind-varieties. |
|
Mar 30 |
asked | What’s the name of “twisted semidirect products”? |
|
Mar 27 |
revised |
Applications of n-dimensional crystallographic groups deleted 23 characters in body |
|
Mar 18 |
awarded | ● Yearling |
|
Mar 11 |
comment |
Applications of n-dimensional crystallographic groups Thanks Gerry M. for correcting the typos - it was late here and I typed too hastily. |
|
Mar 10 |
asked | Applications of n-dimensional crystallographic groups |
|
Mar 7 |
awarded | ● Good Question |
|
Mar 6 |
revised |
Fundamental domain for subgroup of fuchsian Schottky group. edited title |
|
Mar 1 |
revised |
A little question on certain parallel-lines-preserving maps edited tags |
|
Mar 1 |
revised |
A little question on certain parallel-lines-preserving maps added 77 characters in body; added 36 characters in body |
|
Mar 1 |
comment |
A little question on certain parallel-lines-preserving maps Thanks Misha, I was not aware of that '800 classical result. |
|
Mar 1 |
asked | A little question on certain parallel-lines-preserving maps |
|
Feb 28 |
comment |
Research level applications of “row rank = column rank”? (I took the liberty of editing the title because, adding the " " ) |
|
Feb 28 |
revised |
Research level applications of “row rank = column rank”? edited title |
|
Feb 27 |
awarded | ● Favorite Question |
|
Feb 24 |
comment |
Undecidability and holomorphic functions (Reference request) @AdamEpstein: amazon.com/… (I'm quite sure F. Di Biase has obtained some results related to my question; actually, I'm not sure if also the work with Krantz had some "undecidability" aspects) |
|
Feb 24 |
comment |
Undecidability and holomorphic functions (Reference request) @AdamEpstein: amazon.it/Fatou-Type-Theorems-Functions-ebook/dp/… |
|
Feb 23 |
revised |
Why is it important that partial derivatives commute? edited body |
|
Feb 22 |
comment |
Understanding Adjointness of Sheaves in Algebraic Geometry In the last sentence: is it the germ ($\in$ the stalk $\mathcal{G}_x$) or the "value" ($\in$ the fiber $\mathcal{G}\otimes_{\mathcal{O_Y}} \kappa (x)$)? |
|
Feb 20 |
asked | Undecidability and holomorphic functions (Reference request) |
|
Feb 17 |
comment |
Vector bundles vs principal $G$-bundles I think you meant " vector bundle associated with [...]", not " $G$-bundle associated with [...]". |
|
Feb 17 |
comment |
Alternate definition of vector bundle? @Martin: a morphism is a map $f: E\to F$ over $B$ such that for every $p\in B$, for every $\alpha$ of a covering that trivializes both bundles, the map $\phi_{\alpha}^F \circ f|_{E_p} \circ (\phi_{\alpha}^E)^{-1} : \mathbb{R}^k \to \mathbb{R}^k$, with the obvious notations, is linear. Are there problems with this definition? |
|
Feb 16 |
awarded | ● Notable Question |
|
Feb 15 |
revised |
excision in algebraic de Rham cohomology added 1 characters in body; added 2 characters in body |
|
Feb 15 |
comment |
Using schemes to prove things about rings Why do you apologize for asking a big list question? |
|
Feb 15 |
comment |
Alternate definition of vector bundle? For me the usual definition of vector bundle is: you have diffeomorphisms $\phi:\pi^{-1}(U_{\alpha}) \to U_{\alpha} \times \mathbb{R}^k$ over $U_{\alpha}$, where { $U_{\alpha}$ } is a covering of $B$, and the transition functions $\phi_{\beta} \circ \phi_{\alpha}^{-1} : U_{\alpha\beta} \times \mathbb{R}^k\to U_{\alpha\beta}\times\mathbb{R}^k$ over $U_{\alpha \beta}=U_{\alpha}\cap U_{\beta}$ are fiberwise linear maps. |
|
Feb 14 |
awarded | ● Popular Question |
|
Feb 8 |
comment |
Why is Set, and not Rel, so ubiquitous in mathematics? @Mariano: LoL, I now understand your comment - I didn't re-read my own question carefully enough! Edited. Now I hope the first sentence sounds less circular :) |
|
Feb 8 |
revised |
Why is Set, and not Rel, so ubiquitous in mathematics? deleted 4 characters in body |
|
Feb 8 |
comment |
Is a variety of algebras a set? I don't understand the question. If $A$ is an algebra in the "variety" deined by $\mathfrak{F}$, then each $A \times \{ \alpha \}$ is in the same variety, for all $\alpha \in \mathsf{Ord}$. |
|
Feb 8 |
awarded | ● Good Question |
|
Feb 7 |
comment |
Why is Set, and not Rel, so ubiquitous in mathematics? @Ronnie Brown: maybe a modern way to conceptualize partial-function solutions of ODEs and PDEs is just sheaf theory. If the "sheaf of local solutions" of a differential operator is taken as a subsheaf of the sheaf of germs of continuous/smooth/analytic functions, it allows you to express that the solutions vary continuously/smoothy/analytically etc. |
|
Feb 7 |
comment |
Why is Set, and not Rel, so ubiquitous in mathematics? Another question could be: $\mathsf{Set}$ is to a general topos as $\mathsf{Rel}$ is to what structure? |
|
Feb 7 |
comment |
Why is Set, and not Rel, so ubiquitous in mathematics? * Typo: "[...] a Yoneda's lemma for Rel Wich is about [...]" should read "[...] a Yoneda's lemma for Rel is about [...]" in the above comment. |
|
Feb 7 |
comment |
Why is Set, and not Rel, so ubiquitous in mathematics? @DanielMoskovich: Yoneda's lemma states that there's a fully faithful embedding of a category $\mathcal{C}$ into the category $\mathsf{Cat}(\mathcal{C}^{\mathrm{op}},\mathsf{Set})$. Perhaps a Yoneda's lemma for Rel Which is about the relationship between $\mathcal{C}$ and $\mathsf{Cat}(\mathcal{C}^{\mathrm{op}},\mathsf{Rel})$, or maybe something less naif. Also, simplicial sets are objects of $\mathsf{Set}^\Delta$; what about $\mathsf{Rel}^\Delta$? |
|
Feb 7 |
comment |
Why is Set, and not Rel, so ubiquitous in mathematics? Thanks for editing the title. |
|
Feb 7 |
awarded | ● Nice Question |
|
Feb 7 |
asked | Why is Set, and not Rel, so ubiquitous in mathematics? |
|
Feb 6 |
comment |
Ring with three binary operations @NoahStein: appearently, one cannot have too much "distributivity": see my answer about Eckmann-Hilton theorem. |

