Impact
~83k
people reached
- 0 posts edited
- 0 helpful flags
- 579 votes cast
Oct
24 |
comment |
Slick ways to make annoying verifications
@Charles : yes, sorry, I forgot to say "free", so the modules should be free of the same rank. Thanks. |
Oct
23 |
answered | Slick ways to make annoying verifications |
Oct
23 |
comment |
Slick ways to make annoying verifications
And the closed graph criteria also works in a compact space! |
Oct
21 |
awarded | Nice Answer |
Oct
21 |
answered | Lost soul: loneliness in pursing math. Advice needed. |
Oct
5 |
answered | The significance of modularity for all Galois representations |
Sep
30 |
awarded | Enlightened |
Sep
30 |
awarded | Nice Answer |
Sep
29 |
revised |
Decomposition of Matrices in Semisimple and Nilpotent Parts
added 82 characters in body |
Sep
29 |
answered | Decomposition of Matrices in Semisimple and Nilpotent Parts |
Sep
29 |
revised |
Are D_dR and D_st “potentially comparable”?
added 62 characters in body |
Sep
29 |
comment |
Are D_dR and D_st “potentially comparable”?
By the way, these "thin subsets" are called "parties fines" in our article. I suspect that my coauthor was playing a joke on me (and the readers) since I later found out that in French, "partie fine" also means "orgy". |
Sep
29 |
answered | Are D_dR and D_st “potentially comparable”? |
Sep
6 |
comment |
local galois representation with higher coefficient
If you're looking at linear representations of $G$ with coefficients, then everything works "the same". See for example 3.1 of Breuil-Mézard's 2002 Duke paper. |
Sep
6 |
revised |
local galois representation with higher coefficient
added 4 characters in body |
Sep
6 |
revised |
local galois representation with higher coefficient
added 191 characters in body |
Sep
6 |
comment |
local galois representation with higher coefficient
You also changed the setting completely. Is $F$ an extension of $K$ or a subfield of $K$?? |
Sep
6 |
answered | local galois representation with higher coefficient |
Aug
16 |
comment |
Is there a “trianguline period ring”, or is one expected?
This ring has not been studied. At some point, my student Di Matteo was interested in it, so you could ask him. |
Aug
4 |
comment |
Valuations on tensor products
Isn't this just a matter of saying $v(b \otimes c) = v(b) + v(c)$ and letting the valuation of an element of $B \otimes C$ be the sup, over all possible ways to write the element as $\sum b_i \otimes c_i$, of $\inf_i v(b_i \otimes c_i)$? |