Timeline for Positivity in stack geometry
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 11, 2015 at 20:45 | comment | added | Daniel Bergh | Here is a related question: mathoverflow.net/questions/204701/… | |
| Aug 12, 2013 at 13:52 | history | edited | Lennart Meier | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
typos
|
| Mar 22, 2010 at 14:00 | history | edited | Andrea Ferretti | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 658 characters in body
|
| Mar 16, 2010 at 13:26 | answer | added | mdeland | timeline score: 7 | |
| Mar 16, 2010 at 4:18 | answer | added | Tony Pantev | timeline score: 5 | |
| Mar 16, 2010 at 0:35 | comment | added | Andrea Ferretti | Yes, I know one can define some intersection theory, but I'm not sure that copying the usual definitions is the right thing to do. For example, should we define ample bundles by Serre vanishing or by Nakai-Moishezon's criterion, or something else? In the scheme case, they are of course equivalent, but I don't know for stacks. | |
| Mar 16, 2010 at 0:31 | answer | added | Zsolt Patakfalvi | timeline score: 9 | |
| Mar 16, 2010 at 0:14 | comment | added | Charles Siegel | I don't know the answer, but it should make sense, as we can define line bundles on stacks and we can define projective stacks, so presumably we can have very ample line bundles on stacks, in particular. Also, there's some intersection theory on stacks, but again, I don't know much. | |
| Mar 16, 2010 at 0:02 | history | asked | Andrea Ferretti | CC BY-SA 2.5 |