Timeline for A big line bundle in complex compact manifold
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 2, 2020 at 19:59 | comment | added | diverietti | @wnx I was (and am) totally calm! My tone wasn't aggressive, maybe I had to add some emoticon? :) This said, the OPs question lacks a lot of information and has indeed some mistakes in it! It is indeed quite indecipherable. But it's not a big deal, right? I was just trying to push the OPs to reformulate better his question, for his own advantage! | |
| Oct 3, 2020 at 19:33 | comment | added | diverietti | @Samir, thai is as wrong as possibile, in general! Once again you should write better your original question! What do you have in mind? A projective manifold? Or merely a compact complex one? | |
| Oct 2, 2020 at 16:07 | vote | accept | Samir | ||
| Oct 2, 2020 at 16:03 | comment | added | Samir | @diverietti I think that if $ K_X $ is not nef, then $ \mathcal {k} (X) = - \infty $ where $ \mathcal {k} (X) $ is the Kodaira dimension | |
| Oct 2, 2020 at 14:39 | history | edited | diverietti | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| Oct 2, 2020 at 14:37 | comment | added | abx | @diverietti: Yes, of course I had the projective case in mind. And I don't understand either... | |
| Oct 2, 2020 at 14:30 | answer | added | diverietti | timeline score: 5 | |
| Oct 2, 2020 at 13:38 | comment | added | diverietti | In any case I really don't understand what the OP would like to know... | |
| Oct 2, 2020 at 13:35 | comment | added | diverietti | @abx what you say it's ok for projective manifolds. But this is merely compact complex. Even in the compact Kähler case "$K_X$ not nef implies presence of rational curves" is not known! | |
| Oct 2, 2020 at 13:13 | comment | added | abx | @diverietti: if $X$ is not minimal it contains some rational curve, which lifts to the universal covering. | |
| Oct 2, 2020 at 12:55 | comment | added | diverietti | @abx thanks. But still, I don't immediately see why if $X$ satisfies 1) and 2), then this is true... | |
| Oct 2, 2020 at 12:45 | review | Close votes | |||
| Oct 8, 2020 at 3:04 | |||||
| Oct 2, 2020 at 12:29 | comment | added | abx | I suspect the OP claims this only for $X$ satisfying 1) and 2). But the question certainly needs to be clarified. | |
| Oct 2, 2020 at 12:21 | comment | added | diverietti | $K_X$ big does NOT imply $K_X$ nef, nor in general neither in this case. | |
| Oct 2, 2020 at 10:41 | history | asked | Samir | CC BY-SA 4.0 |