Timeline for Motivation behind the construction of Deligne and Lusztig
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 2, 2014 at 20:19 | answer | added | Geordie Williamson | timeline score: 26 | |
| Oct 15, 2012 at 1:36 | vote | accept | senti_today | ||
| Oct 15, 2012 at 1:35 | history | edited | senti_today | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited body
|
| Oct 14, 2012 at 20:51 | answer | added | Jim Humphreys | timeline score: 15 | |
| Oct 14, 2012 at 20:37 | comment | added | Jim Humphreys | I'll attempt an "answer" but should also point out that the spelling is "Macdonald". (A group theorist named Ian D. MacDonald also appears in the literature but is not the more famous Ian G. Macdonald.) | |
| Oct 12, 2012 at 17:22 | comment | added | senti_today | This is true, although the D-L varieties corresponding to usual H-C induction are finite sets, which makes the leap even bigger, in some sense! I am in no way trying to downplay the genius of Deligne and Lusztig; however, there are many other very remarkable constructions in mathematics that do have intuitive explanations behind them. For a related example, look at Lusztig's theory of character sheaves: their definition is also not at all obvious, but it was motivated by a huge amount of concrete calculations, unlike the Deligne-Lusztig theory, which appears to have grown out of one example. | |
| Oct 12, 2012 at 15:15 | comment | added | Nick Gill | If I understand correctly, Deligne-Lusztig theory can be thought of as a generalization of Harish-Chandra induction. The original HCI only applies to rational parabolic subgroups and DLI extends it to non-rational parabolics. So I guess the known properties of HCI would have helped Deligne and Lusztig create their theory.... I still think that the leap remains giant and that the ability to make this leap signifies genius - what more can be said? | |
| Oct 12, 2012 at 14:51 | history | asked | senti_today | CC BY-SA 3.0 |