Timeline for Example to show that the inverse image under a finite morphism is not t-exact with respect to the perverse t-structure
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 13, 2014 at 2:13 | vote | accept | Yellow Pig | ||
| Dec 13, 2014 at 2:13 | |||||
| Dec 11, 2014 at 17:47 | comment | added | Dan Petersen | You're absolutely right, I managed to confuse myself when writing the answer. I changed the example, now it should be OK. | |
| Dec 11, 2014 at 17:46 | history | edited | Dan Petersen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 295 characters in body
|
| Dec 11, 2014 at 15:10 | comment | added | Yellow Pig | Sorry, I just wanted to say that I found the fact that the shifted constant sheaf on a locally compete intersection is perverse here: mathoverflow.net/questions/76186/… | |
| Dec 11, 2014 at 15:03 | comment | added | Yellow Pig | Thank you very much! I am confused because I thought that the shifted constant sheaf on a locally complete intersection is perverse. If two lines glued at a point means the union of coordinate axes in the coordinate plane then it is a locally complete intersection, so I am getting a contradiction. Do you mean something else by two lines glued at a point? | |
| Dec 11, 2014 at 8:22 | history | edited | Dan Petersen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 26 characters in body
|
| Dec 11, 2014 at 8:07 | history | answered | Dan Petersen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |