Timeline for Character table does not determine group Vs Tannaka duality
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 20, 2013 at 2:02 | comment | added | Paul Pearson | The Lambda ring structure is enough to show that R(D_4) is different from R(Q) via Adams operations built from the Lambda ring structure. | |
| Jan 10, 2010 at 22:09 | history | edited | David E Speyer | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 48 characters in body
|
| Jan 10, 2010 at 21:46 | comment | added | David E Speyer | Qiaochu's question about Lambda rings is answered below by Mariano; the answer is no. | |
| Jan 10, 2010 at 20:58 | comment | added | Kevin Buzzard | Thanks David. I knew from the Tannakian formalism that "something like this had to be true", but seeing the explicit example is really great. I feel like I should steal from your answer and Theo's answer to make my answer "even better" with edits, but on the other hand I could just save myself a job and do nothing because your answers won't go away. I think this is great: it seems to me that we now have completely concrete illustrations of how the categories are similar and how they differ in this case. | |
| Jan 10, 2010 at 16:54 | comment | added | David E Speyer | I was wondering that myself! I don't know. | |
| Jan 10, 2010 at 16:38 | comment | added | Qiaochu Yuan | Interesting. Out of curiosity, is the structure of R(G) as a lambda-ring enough to distinguish finite groups? | |
| Jan 10, 2010 at 16:35 | history | answered | David E Speyer | CC BY-SA 2.5 |