Timeline for Is there a definition of supercupidal parameter in the Local Langland correspondence?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 30, 2017 at 16:36 | comment | added | PL. | You're welcome! Yes, that should be the correct interpretation on the Galois side of my comment about central characters. | |
| Jun 28, 2017 at 10:45 | comment | added | Monty | I see. I learned much from your answer. I think we can produce a tempered tame regular discrete parameters from a tame regular discrete parameters by twisting it with inverse of the central character of given parameter. Your answer helped me a lot. Thank you again very much! | |
| Jun 28, 2017 at 6:35 | comment | added | PL. | Off the top of my head, no. But this is the same as asking whether the corresponding L-packet contains a tempered supercuspidal, right? Is it not the case that a supercuspidal (more generally: a discrete series) is tempered if and only if it is unitary, which is true if and only if it has unitary central character? I don't really think about tempered-ness very often, but I think that's true? | |
| Jun 28, 2017 at 5:48 | comment | added | Monty | I really thank you for your answer. It helped me very much. May I ask one more question? I am wondering whether the tame regular discrete parameters they [DeBAcker-Reeder] defined is tempered. I know it is generic but I am not certain it is tempered. If it is not tempered in general, can we know that there exists at least one $L$-paramater which is not only tempered but also tame regular discrete. Do you have any hint of it? | |
| Jun 28, 2017 at 5:07 | vote | accept | Monty | ||
| Jun 25, 2017 at 13:41 | history | answered | PL. | CC BY-SA 3.0 |