Timeline for Compactifying the space of indecomposable abelian varieties
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 18, 2013 at 1:53 | comment | added | Dan Petersen | Aah, absolutely, apologies. I'm too used to only thinking about ppav's. | |
| Aug 17, 2013 at 22:07 | comment | added | Damian Rössler | Just one more thing (this is what threw me off): you have to consider products of abelian varieties together with the polarisation in the definition of decomposability (ie consider the product polarisations). | |
| Aug 15, 2013 at 6:04 | comment | added | Dan Petersen | Being indecomposable is also equivalent to not being in the image of any of the finitely many "gluing" maps $A_h \times A_{g-h} \to A_g$. | |
| Aug 14, 2013 at 21:56 | comment | added | Damian Rössler | Why is the property of being indecomposable an open condition ? This property is equivalent to the existence of an idempotent in the endomorphism algebra of the abelian variety and I don't see why this should be a constructible (let alone open) property (sorry if I missed an obvious point). | |
| Aug 14, 2013 at 8:50 | comment | added | Dan Petersen | I mean not a product of lower-dimensional abelian varieties. They are allowed to be isogenous to such a product. | |
| Aug 14, 2013 at 8:26 | comment | added | Damian Rössler | What do you mean by "indecomposable" ? | |
| Aug 13, 2013 at 18:46 | history | asked | Dan Petersen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |