Timeline for What is a (generalized) BN-pair?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 23, 2012 at 16:22 | vote | accept | Bugs Bunny | ||
| Jun 27, 2012 at 13:56 | answer | added | Tom De Medts | timeline score: 4 | |
| Jun 27, 2012 at 12:47 | answer | added | Jim Humphreys | timeline score: 6 | |
| Jun 27, 2012 at 12:45 | answer | added | Marc Palm | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jun 27, 2012 at 11:51 | comment | added | Bugs Bunny | Thanks, Jim, corrected. In a "Chevalley group" SL you have BN-pair but you cannot extend it GL... unless I have gone completely looney... | |
| Jun 27, 2012 at 11:48 | history | edited | Bugs Bunny | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| Jun 27, 2012 at 11:25 | comment | added | Jim Humphreys | P.S. Your formulation of axiom (BN2) needs the symbol "not equal" in place of "not a member of". | |
| Jun 27, 2012 at 11:22 | comment | added | Jim Humphreys | I'm not sure what your starting point is, but the original treatment of BN-pairs in "Chevalley groups" over local fields (which more or less covers the general linear case) was done by Iwahori and Matsumoto in their 1965 IHES paper: numdam.org/numdam-bin/fitem?id=PMIHES_1965__25__5_0 | |
| Jun 27, 2012 at 8:34 | history | asked | Bugs Bunny | CC BY-SA 3.0 |