Timeline for When do the $\gamma$-filtration and codimension filtration of K-theory agree?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 3, 2012 at 13:50 | history | edited | Steven Landsburg | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 15 characters in body
|
| Sep 3, 2012 at 13:45 | comment | added | Steven Landsburg | David: Sorry; I mistyped and put $-q$ where I meant to put ${\cal K}_[-q}$. So you and I meant the same thing --- the zeroth Zariski cohomology of the sheaf ${\cal K}_{-q}$, which is of course just $K_{-q}(k)$. At the risk of rendering your comment confusing to future readers, I'm editing the answer to correct this typo. | |
| Sep 3, 2012 at 8:24 | comment | added | David Loeffler | Hang on, I found it: Totaro, "Milnor K-theory is the simplest part of algebraic K-theory," K-theory 6 (1992). | |
| Sep 3, 2012 at 8:15 | comment | added | David Loeffler | I didn't know the isomorphism between the higher Chow group and Milnor $K$-theory -- what's a good reference for this? And by $H^0(\operatorname{Spec}(k), -q)$ do you mean what I was calling $H^0(\operatorname{Spec}(k), \mathscr{K}_{-q})$, or do you mean Voevodsky-style motivic cohomology $H^0(\operatorname{Spec}(k), \mathbb{Z}(-q))$? | |
| Aug 31, 2012 at 23:36 | history | answered | Steven Landsburg | CC BY-SA 3.0 |