Timeline for Chain homotopy: Why du+ud and not du+vd?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
3 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 6, 2010 at 16:54 | comment | added | Mikhail Bondarko | My paper is certainly related to K-theory; yet none of K-theory is necessary to understand it. It could be interesting to you if you understand t-structures. | |
| Jan 5, 2010 at 23:54 | comment | added | darij grinberg | That's a very nice result! So if $du+vd$ and $dU+Vd$ are two chain morphisms, then $\left(du+vd\right)\left(dU+Vd\right)=ds+sd$, where $s=vdU+uVd$ (because $dud=dvd$ and $dUd=dVd$ due to $du+vd$ and $dU+Vd$ being chain morphisms). I wish I would understand some of your paper, but I fear I'll have to learn some K-theory first. | |
| Jan 5, 2010 at 21:25 | history | answered | Mikhail Bondarko | CC BY-SA 2.5 |