Timeline for Property $\Gamma$ in terms of Correspondences
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 15, 2019 at 8:48 | vote | accept | Jon Bannon | ||
| Feb 15, 2019 at 8:42 | answer | added | Narutaka OZAWA | timeline score: 6 | |
| Feb 14, 2019 at 16:44 | history | edited | Jon Bannon | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 505 characters in body
|
| Feb 14, 2019 at 16:44 | comment | added | Jon Bannon | I have, perhaps inelegantly, incorporated the distinction Yemon points out in the body of the question. | |
| Feb 14, 2019 at 14:35 | comment | added | Jon Bannon | In fact it is not. In Popa's original preprint only closure was considered without multiplicity. With multiplicity, the first proposed characterization of Gamma holds for all N, even those without Gamma. I am interested in an answer to the question using either notion of weak containment. Thanks Yemon! | |
| Feb 14, 2019 at 14:29 | comment | added | Yemon Choi | Jon, are you sure that the definition of weak containment in Popa86 ("weak subequivalence") is the same as the definition of weak containment in your 2nd paragraph? | |
| Feb 14, 2019 at 14:04 | history | edited | Jon Bannon | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 246 characters in body
|
| Feb 14, 2019 at 13:58 | history | asked | Jon Bannon | CC BY-SA 4.0 |