Timeline for Any holomorphic vector bundle over a compact Riemann surface can be defined by only one transition function?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 18, 2019 at 22:51 | vote | accept | zudumazics | ||
| Apr 16, 2019 at 15:24 | vote | accept | zudumazics | ||
| Apr 16, 2019 at 15:25 | |||||
| Apr 14, 2019 at 19:18 | answer | added | Alexander Chervov | timeline score: 7 | |
| Apr 14, 2019 at 14:05 | comment | added | Phil Tosteson | The cocycle condition for $H^1$ on a 2 set cover is trivial. But the coboundaries are not-- these tell you when your perturbed bundle is isomorphic to the original. | |
| Apr 14, 2019 at 13:16 | comment | added | zudumazics | @AlexanderChervov I have also added another issue in my question. It would be great if you could have a look. | |
| Apr 14, 2019 at 13:16 | history | edited | zudumazics | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 780 characters in body; edited tags
|
| Apr 14, 2019 at 12:44 | comment | added | zudumazics | @AlexanderChervov could you please elaborate? for me one transition function over an annulus is as explicit a description one could hope for for the moduli space of bundles. at least, locally. | |
| Apr 14, 2019 at 12:40 | comment | added | Alexander Chervov | Yes that is correct. However it is not a way to work with bundles 'explicitly', as beginner may hope. | |
| Apr 14, 2019 at 12:05 | review | First posts | |||
| Apr 14, 2019 at 12:14 | |||||
| Apr 14, 2019 at 12:01 | history | asked | zudumazics | CC BY-SA 4.0 |