Timeline for Why no abelian varieties over Z?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S Dec 6, 2022 at 0:21 | history | suggested | The Amplitwist | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
fixed broken link to springerlink.com; added full citation in tooltip
|
| Dec 5, 2022 at 17:36 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Dec 6, 2022 at 0:21 | |||||
| Jun 29, 2010 at 16:27 | answer | added | Emmanuel Kowalski | timeline score: 13 | |
| Jun 9, 2010 at 0:49 | comment | added | Victor Protsak | On the other hand, Russian translation of Lang's Diophantine Geometry contains a very good survey of Zarkhin and Parshin about finiteness problems in diophantine geometry, including a sketch of Faltings' proof, and they give attribution to Abrashkin and Fontaine (independently). That's where I read it first. So it depends on the country. | |
| Jun 8, 2010 at 19:53 | answer | added | ACL | timeline score: 7 | |
| Feb 10, 2010 at 7:20 | comment | added | Kevin Buzzard | @Anweshi: I'm not so sure that this is true. Careful people often cite it as "proved independently by Fontaine and Abrashkin". Here's a conjecture as to why Fontaine gets more hits and Abrashkin though: when Faltings proved Mordell there was a book written containing a lot of the ideas of the proof and accessible to grad students called "Arithmetic Geometry" by Cornell-Silverman, and in one of the articles there, much read by grad students presumably, they say it's "a very recent theorem of Fontaine". | |
| Jan 13, 2010 at 15:09 | answer | added | user19475 | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jan 10, 2010 at 15:27 | comment | added | Anweshi | @Bjorn. Then how did it so happen that this theorem is known in the name of Fontaine alone? Perhaps, in the context of the "big picture" of Fontaine theory? | |
| Jan 6, 2010 at 12:33 | comment | added | Ilya Nikokoshev | I found a way to "donate reputation to Shafarevich": I can post a question with bounty "on his behalf". Would you like to try giving a question? | |
| Jan 6, 2010 at 11:56 | vote | accept | Ilya Nikokoshev | ||
| Jan 6, 2010 at 4:42 | comment | added | Bjorn Poonen | It was Shafarevich who at the 1962 ICM asked whether this set was empty, so maybe he should get the mathoverflow "reputation". :) According to Parshin, Abrashkin proved the result independently of Fontaine at about the same time: see the addendum at the end of Fontaine's paper, and see Abrashkin, V. A. Galois modules of group schemes of period $p$ over the ring of Witt vectors. (Russian) Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR Ser. Mat. 51 (1987), no. 4, 691--736, 910; translation in Math. USSR-Izv. 31 (1988), no. 1, 1--46. | |
| Jan 6, 2010 at 0:52 | answer | added | Ilya Nikokoshev | timeline score: 10 | |
| Jan 5, 2010 at 23:16 | answer | added | Emerton | timeline score: 39 | |
| Jan 5, 2010 at 23:08 | history | edited | Ilya Nikokoshev | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
correction
|
| Jan 5, 2010 at 22:59 | history | asked | Ilya Nikokoshev | CC BY-SA 2.5 |