bio | website | |
---|---|---|
location | ||
age | ||
visits | member for | 4 years, 11 months |
seen | Jan 3 '14 at 9:16 | |
stats | profile views | 3,465 |
I'm interested in many things, but algebraic geometry I love.
Jan 3 |
revised |
Getting the story of Dynkin and Satake diagrams straight
added 1123 characters in body |
Dec 22 |
comment |
What is the motivation for defining the conductor of an abelian variety?
Kestutis, is the description you gave here the motivation for defining a conductor of an abelian group? What (originally) was the purpose of this notion? |
Dec 22 |
comment |
What is the motivation for defining the conductor of an abelian variety?
Kestutis, that sounds exactly like the kind of explanation I want. Where can I read more about this? (In particular I am not familiar with "semisimplification" and "Grothendieck's quasi-unipotence thm".) Noam, in that case what makes the definition of an abelian variety over a global field natural? |
Dec 22 |
comment |
What is the motivation for defining the conductor of an abelian variety?
Ah, I see. Is it some limit of this procedure, or am I completely on the wrong track? |
Dec 22 |
asked | What is the motivation for defining the conductor of an abelian variety? |
Nov 30 |
awarded | Notable Question |
Sep 21 |
awarded | Famous Question |
Sep 4 |
awarded | Favorite Question |
Jun 24 |
accepted | How can one interpret homology and Stokes' Theorem via derived categories? |
Jun 24 |
awarded | Nice Question |
Jun 23 |
comment |
How can one interpret homology and Stokes' Theorem via derived categories?
Thanks, Denis! That sounds exactly like the kind of thing I'm looking for. Do you have a reference I can look at? |
Jun 23 |
comment |
How can one interpret homology and Stokes' Theorem via derived categories?
The question is: what is a reference for a proof of Stokes' Theorem using derived categories? That sounds pretty well defined for me. If people prefer, they can give a proof of Stokes' Theorem using derived categories rather than to give a reference. Is that really not well-defined? |
Jun 23 |
revised |
How can one interpret homology and Stokes' Theorem via derived categories?
deleted 1 characters in body |
Jun 23 |
asked | How can one interpret homology and Stokes' Theorem via derived categories? |
May 1 |
awarded | Yearling |
Apr 3 |
comment |
Is there a nice criterion for when the splitting fields of two irreducible polynomials are equal?
I'm looking for something with more insight, I'm afraid... I suppose if there is none then there is none. But I'm still holding out hope that someone will tell me that there is some paper that I should read about it, or that it somehow has to do with cohomology, or whatever insight might come this way... (BTW, the third question was a statement, not a question: "It is possible" rather than "Is it possible".) |
Apr 3 |
asked | Is there a nice criterion for when the splitting fields of two irreducible polynomials are equal? |
Jan 24 |
awarded | Stellar Question |
Jan 21 |
comment |
Does the proof of GAGA use the axiom of choice?
*sorry, I meant: "the algebraic sheaf that induces a particular analytic sheaf". @nosr, that sounds more along the lines I was thinking of, but I can't say that I myself am familiar with all the details of the proof. It most certainly is false that GAGA is constructive, and there have been many papers trying to understand the relationship between the analytic side and the algebraic side better. |
Jan 21 |
comment |
Does the proof of GAGA use the axiom of choice?
Duff is right. It is generally not well understood how to find the algebraic sheaf that induces a particular algebraic sheaf. It is very misleading to say that GAGA is obvious in any way. |