Timeline for Confusion over spin representation and coordinate ring of orthogonal Grassmannian
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 21, 2020 at 14:52 | answer | added | Vít Tuček | timeline score: 1 | |
| May 21, 2020 at 12:41 | comment | added | Sam Hopkins | @VítTuček: Uh, I'm not sure of a precise reference- I thought this was classical. It is mentioned in some other MO questions too: mathoverflow.net/questions/23426/…, mathoverflow.net/questions/319903/… | |
| May 21, 2020 at 7:28 | comment | added | Vít Tuček | @SamHopkins Could you please cite the version of Borel-Weil theorem you are using? | |
| May 18, 2020 at 14:28 | vote | accept | Sam Hopkins | ||
| May 18, 2020 at 14:24 | answer | added | Bertram Arnold | timeline score: 3 | |
| May 18, 2020 at 14:21 | comment | added | Sam Hopkins | Is $\mathrm{Spin}(2n+1)/P$ not isomorphic to $\mathrm{SO}(2n+1)/P$? | |
| May 18, 2020 at 14:16 | comment | added | Gro-Tsen | Isn't it simply that you get $V^{2\omega_1}$ (the Cartan square of the spin representation, which is defined at the level of $G$) as you describe, and that if you wish to recover $V^{\omega_1}$ you need to move to the $2$-fold covering $\mathrm{Spin}(2n+1)/P$ of $\mathrm{SO}(2n+1)/P$ to get a square root of the line bundle? (Disclaimer: I didn't give this much thought, so maybe this is stupid.) | |
| May 18, 2020 at 13:25 | history | asked | Sam Hopkins | CC BY-SA 4.0 |