Timeline for Two basic questions on parabolic induction
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 7 at 16:02 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Apr 7 at 14:16 | history | edited | Paul Broussous | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Two basic questionS (I added "s")
|
| Apr 6 at 22:04 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Dec 8, 2023 at 22:03 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Aug 10, 2023 at 21:07 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Apr 12, 2023 at 18:08 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Mar 13, 2023 at 2:42 | answer | added | Kenta Suzuki | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jul 17, 2018 at 8:34 | history | edited | Monty | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 30 characters in body
|
| Jul 17, 2018 at 8:30 | comment | added | Cheng-Chiang Tsai | Ouch. I am sorry. Yes I did mean this linked paper. | |
| Jul 17, 2018 at 8:05 | comment | added | Monty | Dear Tsai, Thank you! I think the first one you wwrote is right! The paper of BZ you meant is math.tau.ac.il/~bernstei/Publication_list/publication_texts/…? If so, I confused it with another paper. Ok. I will read the 4 sections of the paper. Thank you very much! | |
| Jul 17, 2018 at 7:27 | comment | added | Cheng-Chiang Tsai | I think about it a bit. I think the first one should be $\mathrm{Ind}_P^{GL_2}(\chi_1|\cdot\boxtimes \chi_2|\cdot|)$, if so it should follow directly from definition? For the second, this is where we like to know about BZ's result on intertwining. I also don't think that's the correct one, but I would suggest to look at the detail of BZ, at least first 4 sections. | |
| Jul 17, 2018 at 4:49 | comment | added | Monty | Dear Tsai, Thank you for your comments. Then do you think that the things I wrote is right? I have read BZ paper but I couldn’t find the relevant contents with my question. But I will try to read it again. Thank you very much! | |
| Jul 15, 2018 at 22:02 | comment | added | Cheng-Chiang Tsai | Dear Monty, the detail doesn't come to my mind right away (nor for the other question), but I highly recommend reading Bernstein-Zelevinsky if your $F$ is non-arch. (I personally don't enjoy reading paper much, but still!). To me it's like: if all rep'ns are semisimple, then things just follow from Mackey theory, and BZ has the trick that bypass most or all of this difficulty. | |
| Jul 15, 2018 at 15:03 | history | asked | Monty | CC BY-SA 4.0 |