Timeline for vanishing of local cohomology $H^2_{(x,y)}\left(\frac{\Bbb Z[x,y]}{(5x+4y)}\right)=0$
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 11, 2012 at 8:21 | history | edited | Damian Rössler | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 28 characters in body
|
| Dec 8, 2012 at 10:22 | comment | added | Damian Rössler | @YACP: I understood Angel's comment as meaning exactly what you are saying; ie Angel explained with his terse vanishing statement that my answer was flawed (which is true), because my answer implied that (incorrect) vanishing. | |
| Dec 7, 2012 at 19:02 | comment | added | user26857 | I don't know what are you talking about, but what I said referred to you comment, that is, $H_{(x,y)}^2(\mathbb Z[x,y])=0$ implies, by localizing to $Z−\{0\}$, that the similar local cohomology over $\mathbb Q$ is $0$ and this is false! | |
| Dec 7, 2012 at 14:20 | comment | added | Angel | We should use property of $(5x+4y)$ under localization at $P$. Lichtenbaum,-Hartshorne vanishing Theorem may be useful. | |
| Dec 6, 2012 at 18:21 | history | edited | Damian Rössler | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 449 characters in body
|
| Dec 6, 2012 at 16:27 | history | edited | Charles Staats | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
improved tex
|
| Dec 6, 2012 at 11:31 | history | answered | Damian Rössler | CC BY-SA 3.0 |