Timeline for Characterization of certain analytic vector fields on $S^{2}$
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 19, 2015 at 18:26 | comment | added | Loïc Teyssier | No, you're not missing anything. I just wanted to point out that since your motivation (foliations in $\mathbb P_2(\mathbb C)$) was not dealing with topological conjugacy, maybe you wanted a less general question. That's all… | |
| May 19, 2015 at 17:33 | comment | added | Ali Taghavi | @LoïcTeyssier so my question in the post is weaker than what you proposed.analytic conjugacy implies topological one. am I missing some things? | |
| S May 19, 2015 at 17:27 | history | bounty ended | CommunityBot | ||
| S May 19, 2015 at 17:27 | history | notice removed | CommunityBot | ||
| May 18, 2015 at 19:58 | comment | added | Loïc Teyssier | By «orbital equivalence» above I meant to speak of analytical orbital equivalence (=conjugacy), as opposed to topological orbital equivalence (=conjugacy) you speak of. I'm not sure topological equivalence is really what you want, but I can't speak in your stead. | |
| May 18, 2015 at 17:41 | comment | added | Ali Taghavi | @LoïcTeyssier Could you please more explain why in this question, orbital equivalent is more appropriate than topological conjugacy? Moreover by orbital equivalent do you mean a homeomorphism send leaves to leaves regardless of parametrization? In this case, is not this weaker that topological conjugccy(rather than stronger)? | |
| May 18, 2015 at 7:43 | comment | added | Loïc Teyssier | I don't quite see why you speak about topological conjugacy in that case. Wouldn't you want something stronger, like orbital equivalence as foliated analytic spaces ? The topological setting destroys far too structure in my opinion, you take the risk of losing rigidity arising from analyticity.In the complex case, there is no such requirement, since all the usual charts on $\mathbb P_2(\mathbb C)$ are birationnally equivalent. This should also be the case in the real setting because stereographic projection is algebraic. | |
| May 12, 2015 at 9:30 | history | edited | Ali Taghavi | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 11 characters in body
|
| S May 11, 2015 at 15:45 | history | bounty started | Ali Taghavi | ||
| S May 11, 2015 at 15:45 | history | notice added | Ali Taghavi | Draw attention | |
| Aug 27, 2014 at 6:08 | history | edited | Ali Taghavi | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 77 characters in body
|
| Aug 17, 2014 at 7:46 | history | edited | Ali Taghavi | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 90 characters in body
|
| Aug 16, 2014 at 21:39 | history | edited | Ali Taghavi | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited body
|
| Aug 16, 2014 at 19:40 | history | asked | Ali Taghavi | CC BY-SA 3.0 |