Timeline for Mapping scheme from a proper variety
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 20, 2016 at 11:34 | vote | accept | Sasha | ||
| Jan 20, 2016 at 11:32 | vote | accept | Sasha | ||
| Jan 20, 2016 at 11:34 | |||||
| Jan 20, 2016 at 3:04 | answer | added | R. van Dobben de Bruyn | timeline score: 6 | |
| Jan 20, 2016 at 0:37 | comment | added | pro | sorry, I was confused. I take back what I wrote! | |
| Jan 19, 2016 at 23:20 | comment | added | pro | isn't Sym k = k[x]? | |
| Jan 19, 2016 at 22:58 | comment | added | Sasha | I mean Spec of Sym of dual. Why would that be wrong for T a point? It would say that morphisms from $X$ to $\mathbb{A}^1$ are the same as elements of the set $\Gamma(X,\mathcal{O}_X)$, which is correct, no? | |
| Jan 19, 2016 at 19:53 | comment | added | pro | what do you mean by interpreting $\Gamma(X,O)$ as a scheme as usual? Do you mean taking Spec of it, or Spec of Sym of its dual? If the latter, then it's false (eg take X to be projective space and T = Spec k). | |
| Jan 19, 2016 at 13:51 | history | asked | Sasha | CC BY-SA 3.0 |