Timeline for What is a Frobenioid?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 7, 2021 at 23:35 | answer | added | Tim Campion | timeline score: 47 | |
| Feb 12, 2017 at 22:12 | comment | added | Watson | This is possibly related. | |
| Feb 7, 2015 at 8:36 | comment | added | jmc | @FelipeVoloch — That is a pretty common phenomenon, right? Still, in this case I think Mochizuki does emphathize with “the rest of us” to some extent; as can be witnessed in the last section of his latest update. | |
| Feb 6, 2015 at 20:22 | comment | added | Felipe Voloch | "Perhaps this is a key reason he can't understand why the rest of us are so reluctant." So you empathize with him even though he doesn't empathize with you. | |
| Feb 4, 2015 at 15:58 | history | edited | Minhyong Kim | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added a few clarifying lines and changed confusing notation.
|
| Feb 3, 2015 at 12:14 | answer | added | David Roberts♦ | timeline score: 38 | |
| S Feb 2, 2015 at 9:33 | history | suggested | jmc | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
replaces LaTeX with markdown in the main text
|
| Feb 2, 2015 at 9:07 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Feb 2, 2015 at 9:33 | |||||
| Feb 1, 2015 at 10:42 | comment | added | Neil Strickland | @MinhyongKim: no, I'm not asking anything deep. I don't understand the relation with IUTT because I don't really know anything about IUTT, I have only tried to read the anabelian papers. But it seems like the reconstruction theorem might be a manageable, reasonably self-contained thing that one could use as an entry point to the larger Mochizuki project. | |
| Feb 1, 2015 at 9:18 | history | edited | Dan Petersen |
added top level tags
|
|
| Jan 31, 2015 at 20:26 | comment | added | Minhyong Kim | Neil: I'm sure you're asking something deeper, but the short answer to your question is simple. The reconstruction theorems allow us to view certain categories as good combinatorial models of arithmetic geometric objects. For example, the theorem outlined above tells you that a number field can be modelled as a suitable Frobenioid. This is obviously somewhat more elaborate than the theorem that uses only Galois categories, but allows the construction of a Frobenius map (and lift). Anyway, this encoding as a category is the starting point for building categorical deformations of number fields. | |
| Jan 31, 2015 at 20:19 | comment | added | Minhyong Kim | user74230: Many thanks. Typo fixed. | |
| Jan 31, 2015 at 20:18 | history | edited | Minhyong Kim | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 16 characters in body
|
| Jan 31, 2015 at 18:33 | comment | added | Neil Strickland | I have spent a bit of time trying to digest Mochizuki's absolute anabelian framework (which I think is supposed to allow you to reconstruct a number field from its absolute Galois group). I have't understood how that is supposed to relate to IUTT. I will be interested if you ask some similar questions about the anabelian story. | |
| Jan 31, 2015 at 18:30 | comment | added | user74230 | I have heard that sometime in March, Go Yamashita plans to release an exposition of a few hundred pages of the entire proof, written in a more accessible format than that of the original papers, so perhaps we should wait until March to see what is in there? Also, should "$I \in \phi(A)$" be $I \in \phi(X)$" near the displayed expression $(f, I , n)$? | |
| Jan 31, 2015 at 18:04 | history | asked | Minhyong Kim | CC BY-SA 3.0 |