bio | website | |
---|---|---|
location | ||
age | ||
visits | member for | 4 years, 4 months |
seen | Jan 14 at 2:25 | |
stats | profile views | 809 |
Nov 22 |
accepted | amenable + without $BS(m,n)$+finite $K(G,1)$implies virtually cyclic? |
Nov 18 |
comment |
torsion free for the 2nd cohomology group?
@YCor, if my proof is correct, then this is a ``direct" consequence of Popa's cocycle superrigidity result for Bernoulli shift of property (T) group (and of course it holds for a more wider class of groups) plus taking advantage of the principal algebraic action setting, although this is not what my primary goal... |
Nov 18 |
comment |
torsion free for the 2nd cohomology group?
@YCor, thanks for mentioning this group, I learned it from the book on Kazhdan's property (T). And I asked this question because I find a proof that my question has a positive answer but I am not sure whether this is known or not... |
Nov 18 |
comment |
amenable + without $BS(m,n)$+finite $K(G,1)$implies virtually cyclic?
@QiaochuYuan, I am not sure it is suitable to be posted in MO, that's why I first asked it here. |
Nov 18 |
comment |
amenable + without $BS(m,n)$+finite $K(G,1)$implies virtually cyclic?
@QiaochuYuan, yes. |
Nov 17 |
asked | amenable + without $BS(m,n)$+finite $K(G,1)$implies virtually cyclic? |
Nov 11 |
asked | torsion free for the 2nd cohomology group? |
Sep 17 |
comment |
vanishing higher cohomology group for property T group?
@BenWieland, I checked the references you mentioned, but I do not know why the group mentioned by YCor is of type FP. Could you please explain this? |
Sep 14 |
comment |
vanishing higher cohomology group for property T group?
@BenWieland, thanks, I would check that. |
Sep 14 |
comment |
vanishing higher cohomology group for property T group?
@BenWieland, could you give me a reference why the group mentioned by YCor has nontrivial $H^2(G, \mathbb{Z}G)$? |
Sep 14 |
comment |
vanishing higher cohomology group for property T group?
@YCor, thanks for the reference! |
Sep 14 |
comment |
vanishing higher cohomology group for property T group?
@YCor, in Ben's answer above, -3 paragraph, maybe there is some misunderstanding? |
Sep 14 |
comment |
vanishing higher cohomology group for property T group?
@YCor, could you give me the reference on the property T group $G$ you mentioned such that $H^2(G;\mathbb{Z}G)$ is nontrivial? Thanks. |
Aug 21 |
asked | Reference on calculation of 2nd cohomology group |
Aug 11 |
accepted | vanishing higher cohomology group for property T group? |
Aug 9 |
comment |
vanishing higher cohomology group for property T group?
@IgorBelegradek, thanks a lot for clarification! |
Aug 9 |
comment |
vanishing higher cohomology group for property T group?
@IgorBelegradek, I am not able to download the paper you mentioned right now, if I understand your remark correctly, you mean there exists a property $T$ group $G$ with $H^2(G, \mathbb{Z})\neq 0$? |
Aug 8 |
comment |
vanishing higher cohomology group for property T group?
@YCor, you mean for n=2, $G=SL_3(\mathbb{Z})$, the cohomology group vanishes? |
Aug 8 |
asked | vanishing higher cohomology group for property T group? |
Jul 3 |
asked | seek another proof of a result in Fourier analysis |