Timeline for Does the classification of reductive groups follow from that of semisimple groups?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 19, 2016 at 14:47 | comment | added | Jim Humphreys | @Tobias: Thanks for adding the essential word "connected" here. The standard example is a special linear group, which usually has a nontrivial finite center (not connected) but is considered "simple" as an algebraic group. This is the definition I used in my 1975 book, though such conventions about the term "simple" always need to be stated explicitly. | |
| Dec 19, 2016 at 9:27 | comment | added | Tobias Kildetoft | Minor detail: The definition of simple should include "connected" (i.e. no proper normal, closed, connected subgroup). | |
| Dec 15, 2016 at 15:30 | vote | accept | D_S | ||
| Dec 14, 2016 at 21:12 | history | answered | Jim Humphreys | CC BY-SA 3.0 |