Timeline for prequantization on $TM \bigoplus T^*M$
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
19 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 6, 2013 at 13:49 | history | edited | user21574 |
edited tags
|
|
| Jul 6, 2013 at 13:27 | vote | accept | CommunityBot | ||
| Jul 6, 2013 at 12:54 | answer | added | Urs Schreiber | timeline score: 4 | |
| Jul 6, 2013 at 10:09 | answer | added | Chris R | timeline score: 3 | |
| Jul 6, 2013 at 7:25 | comment | added | Vladimir Dotsenko | Your question is somewhat better worded now. As for its previous state, let me put it bluntly: I strongly believe that the rule of a thumb should be that you put in writing your question at least half of the effort you expect someone to put into answering you. If you look at MO questions that get good detailed answers, and also at questions that are upvoted, you will notice that those questions are mostly quite different in style, wording, and level of detail from what you wrote in the first place. Enough said, really. | |
| Jul 5, 2013 at 22:42 | history | edited | user21574 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 35 characters in body
|
| Jul 5, 2013 at 22:32 | history | edited | user21574 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 103 characters in body
|
| Jul 5, 2013 at 22:21 | history | edited | user21574 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 427 characters in body
|
| Jul 5, 2013 at 22:18 | answer | added | Urs Schreiber | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jul 5, 2013 at 22:15 | history | edited | user21574 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 427 characters in body
|
| Jul 5, 2013 at 22:05 | comment | added | user21574 | Mariano Suárez-Alvarez @ Thanks for your advise, I will try to give more explanation for my next questions. | |
| Jul 5, 2013 at 21:59 | comment | added | Mariano Suárez-Álvarez | @HassanJolany, it would not hurt to give some context and/or a reference where "prequantization" or the "Hitchin sense" is explained —even if all this is somewhat standard in the subject. One of the things that keeps MO working is that we all get a chance to learn from it: frankly, your question, as it is, has not taught me anything! | |
| Jul 5, 2013 at 21:56 | history | edited | user21574 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1 characters in body
|
| Jul 5, 2013 at 21:51 | comment | added | user21574 | The fact is that we have a pre-quantization on cotangent bundle $T^*M$ ($M$ is manifold),so the extension of this fact for the manifold $TM\bigoplus T^*M$ which is very important in generalized complex geometry would be a good question in my opinion in general. | |
| Jul 5, 2013 at 21:46 | comment | added | user21574 | Vladimir Dotsenko@ I don't understand your comment. I think we have a normal definition of pre-quantization on a manifold and mathoverflow is not for definition of trivial concepts . So here my manifold is just $TM\bigoplus T^*M$ with Hitchin pair.So where was the difficulty you gave negative point? . Really, such behaviors will disappoint us to work on mathoverflow. I hope the moderators be more active. My question is transparent and a good question. | |
| Jul 5, 2013 at 21:35 | comment | added | Vladimir Dotsenko | Is your first sentence a question or a statement? The word order suggests that it is a question, but it lacks a question mark. Really, putting a bit more effort in typing and wording your request is much more likely to result in any answers at all. | |
| Jul 5, 2013 at 21:30 | comment | added | user21574 | André Henriques@ here I mean normal definition of pre-quantization on a manifold. | |
| Jul 5, 2013 at 21:03 | comment | added | André Henriques | To increase the odds of a useful answer, you might want to include a little explanation of what a "prequantization in Hitchin's sense" is. | |
| Jul 5, 2013 at 18:49 | history | asked | user21574 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |