Timeline for Inverse Limits in the category of Perfectoid Spaces
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 11, 2019 at 23:15 | vote | accept | Alexander | ||
| May 11, 2019 at 16:32 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| May 11, 2019 at 16:43 | |||||
| May 11, 2019 at 16:30 | answer | added | dgulotta | timeline score: 2 | |
| Nov 3, 2016 at 0:30 | comment | added | Stahl | I believe (this agrees with Peter Scholze's "Perfectoid Spaces," at least, and a quick glance at Torsion didn't find anything suggesting otherwise) that the morphisms in the category of perfectoid spaces are simply the morphisms of adic spaces between perfectoid spaces. | |
| Nov 2, 2016 at 19:26 | history | edited | Alexander | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 2 characters in body
|
| Nov 2, 2016 at 12:14 | comment | added | Tim Porter | Would working in a corresponding pro-category be useful in your setting as that has often been the way forward when/if inverse limits as such are not there or are ill behaved? It has the advantage that it often has geometric significance, and then classes of pro-objects for which certain conditions are satisfied naturally come to the surface of the theory. Of course this avoids the question completely! That being so, the morphisms that you allow will be important as David points out. | |
| Nov 2, 2016 at 10:02 | comment | added | David Roberts♦ | It may come down to what morphisms one allows in 'the' category of perfectoid spaces, since this can greatly affect whether limits exist or not. | |
| Nov 2, 2016 at 6:36 | history | edited | Alexander | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 27 characters in body
|
| Nov 2, 2016 at 6:20 | history | asked | Alexander | CC BY-SA 3.0 |