Timeline for To what extent can fields be classified?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 11, 2013 at 2:23 | vote | accept | Drew Armstrong | ||
| Jul 27, 2013 at 8:36 | history | edited | Ricardo Andrade |
added more descriptive top level tags
|
|
| Jul 27, 2013 at 8:12 | answer | added | Pete L. Clark | timeline score: 32 | |
| Jul 10, 2013 at 22:41 | comment | added | Qiaochu Yuan | @Drew: I don't understand what you mean by "ground field." Do you want a list of fields such that every field is a field of finite transcendence degree over a field in that list or something? That doesn't seem easier than listing all fields. If you don't care about finiteness, then every field is a field of some transcendence degree over $\mathbb{Q}$ or $\mathbb{F}_p$. | |
| Jul 10, 2013 at 17:36 | comment | added | Drew Armstrong | @QiaochuYuan: Yes, I'm aware that classifying higher dimensional fields is the same as classifying varieties up to birational equivalence. But what do you think about the problem of classifying "zero-dimensional" fields? I.e. What are all the possible ground fields? | |
| Jul 10, 2013 at 2:32 | comment | added | Joël | Qiaochu, I think you should make your comment an answer. I think it really answers the question. | |
| Jul 9, 2013 at 23:08 | comment | added | Qiaochu Yuan | I think classifying fields of finite transcendence degree over a base field $k$ is equivalent to classifying varieties over $k$ up to birational equivalence, so that in sense algebraic geometers have done a lot of work on this question. | |
| Jul 9, 2013 at 22:04 | answer | added | Jason Starr | timeline score: 7 | |
| Jul 9, 2013 at 21:29 | history | asked | Drew Armstrong | CC BY-SA 3.0 |