Timeline for When is the pushout of projective varieties along embeddings a projective variety?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 5, 2020 at 15:11 | history | edited | Arkadij | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 36 characters in body
|
| Jan 5, 2020 at 14:50 | comment | added | Misha | @ArkadijBojko: In this case, there is no problem and the amalgam will be projective. You can use Ferrand's paper as a reference. I suggest you revise your question clarifying the definition of amalgams you are interested in. | |
| Jan 5, 2020 at 13:49 | comment | added | Laurent Moret-Bailly | See also D. Ferrand, section 6.3 in smf.emath.fr/publications/conducteur-descente-et-pincement | |
| Jan 5, 2020 at 13:40 | comment | added | Arkadij | It seems that in the example 36, they reparametrize the embeddings of the divisor. Is there any indication why a problem might occure if I take equal embeddings? | |
| Jan 5, 2020 at 13:23 | comment | added | Misha | Section 5 here, especially Example 36. It shows that you need to be careful with how you glue the two copies of $D$. | |
| Jan 5, 2020 at 12:42 | history | asked | Arkadij | CC BY-SA 4.0 |