Timeline for elliptic curves and group cohomology
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 10, 2016 at 20:23 | vote | accept | André Henriques | ||
| Dec 23, 2015 at 17:34 | history | edited | André Henriques | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 78 characters in body
|
| Dec 22, 2015 at 6:39 | answer | added | Jacob Lurie | timeline score: 19 | |
| Dec 19, 2015 at 20:52 | comment | added | André Henriques | @Charles Rezk: An answer that only deals with the case of $G$ abelian could already be helpful. | |
| Dec 19, 2015 at 12:07 | comment | added | David Treumann | When $R = \mathbf{C}$, a line bundle on $M_G$ gives for each pair of commuting elements $(x,y)$ in $G$ a homomorphism $\rho:Z_G(x,y) \to \mathbf{C}^*$. If I represent $k$ as a $\mathbf{C}^*$-valued $3$-cocycle $k(g_1,g_2,g_3)$, is there an explicit formula for $\rho(g)$ in terms $k$? Perhaps $\rho(g) = k(x,y,g)$? | |
| Dec 19, 2015 at 7:49 | comment | added | Charles Rezk | Although M_G "is" the moduli stack of G bundles on E, in the formalism (as best I understand it) it is actually defined in terms of induction from abelian subgroups, using that when G is finite abelian, M_G = Hom(A*, E). I would expect the line bundle over it associated to the level k to have a similar description, ultimately relying on the corresponding line bundle over M_U(1) = E. | |
| Dec 19, 2015 at 1:31 | comment | added | pro | out of curiosity: what is the line bundle you know how to define on M_G only over C? | |
| Dec 18, 2015 at 23:22 | answer | added | Qiaochu Yuan | timeline score: 7 | |
| Dec 18, 2015 at 21:33 | comment | added | David Roberts♦ | Ah, that was one option I should have guessed! | |
| Dec 18, 2015 at 21:29 | comment | added | André Henriques | If I don't that assume E is an elliptic curve, then I was thinking of it being a higher genus curve instead. | |
| Dec 18, 2015 at 21:27 | comment | added | David Roberts♦ | If you don't assume $E$ is an elliptic curve, what else would you assume instead? Say a K3 surface? An algebraic variety? | |
| Dec 18, 2015 at 21:20 | history | asked | André Henriques | CC BY-SA 3.0 |