Timeline for How do I compare the different notions of Fourier transform for sheaves?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 21, 2011 at 0:55 | comment | added | Alex |
Laumon has an article on Fourier transform for $\mathbb{G}_m$-equivariant sheaves ("La transformation de Fourier homogène"), but I don't remember if he says anything about Riemann-Hilbert (I think not, but it might still be a useful reference).
|
|
| Nov 20, 2011 at 19:17 | history | edited | Ben Webster♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 21 characters in body; added 11 characters in body
|
| Oct 28, 2009 at 23:13 | comment | added | Ben Webster♦ |
I suppose I should have said G_m equivariant. To take the Fourier transform of anything else is to invite madness into your life.
|
|
| Oct 28, 2009 at 23:11 | history | edited | Ben Webster♦ | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 29 characters in body
|
| Oct 28, 2009 at 23:03 | comment | added | David Treumann | I'm worried about things like the skyscraper D-module on A^1 supported away from the origin. I think that the Fourier transform of this does not have regular singularities, so how can it commute with Riemann-Hilbert? But if I understand you, you're saying that I should be looking at G_m-equivariant sheaves on all of these things, and then there will be a nice comparison theorem. When you put it like that... | |
| Oct 28, 2009 at 21:22 | history | answered | Ben Webster♦ | CC BY-SA 2.5 |