Timeline for Quotients of Abelian varieties by finite groups
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 11, 2022 at 22:40 | history | edited | LSpice | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
I had edited Kummer -> Kümmer while this was on the front page, but that was wrong. Sorry! I thought I checked first.
|
| Aug 10, 2022 at 2:43 | history | edited | LSpice | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Kummer -> Kümmer
|
| Jul 31, 2021 at 16:37 | history | edited | YCor | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
removed capitals from title
|
| May 4, 2021 at 16:36 | answer | added | Martina Monti | timeline score: 2 | |
| Aug 31, 2018 at 13:47 | answer | added | rfauffar | timeline score: 2 | |
| May 17, 2010 at 19:21 | comment | added | unknown | Dear Profs Milne and Clark: Thank you for these responses. And yes, what if I want to ignore polarizations. Are quotients by even just cyclic groups understood? | |
| May 15, 2010 at 12:16 | answer | added | Balazs | timeline score: 2 | |
| May 15, 2010 at 3:39 | answer | added | Jorge Vitório Pereira | timeline score: 7 | |
| May 15, 2010 at 0:23 | comment | added | Pete L. Clark | @Prof. Milne: What Shimura and Taniyama do seems natural in the context of CM theory, since it's the higher-dimensional analogue of the Weber function $h: E -> E/\operatorname{Aut}(E,O)$ for a CM elliptic curve. Still, you could ignore the polarization if you want, and then the possibilities for finite subgroups of automorphisms are much more numerous... | |
| May 14, 2010 at 23:26 | comment | added | JS Milne | The group of automorphisms of a polarized abelian variety is finite, and Shimura and Taniyama (in their famous 1961 book, p35) define a Kummer variety to be the quotient of a polarized abelian variety by the full group of automorphisms. For a general polarized abelian variety, the automorphism group is Z/2Z, and so I expect that they have been most studied in that case. | |
| May 14, 2010 at 19:17 | history | asked | unknown | CC BY-SA 2.5 |