Timeline for Reference request: a tale of two mathematicians
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 17, 2021 at 2:24 | history | edited | José Hdz. Stgo. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 69 characters in body
|
| Nov 25, 2021 at 17:59 | vote | accept | José Hdz. Stgo. | ||
| Oct 14, 2021 at 17:10 | comment | added | F Zaldivar | @dhy and Sam Hopkins, yes indeed. Thanks! | |
| Oct 14, 2021 at 12:54 | comment | added | Sam Hopkins | The number of indecomposables is indeed the number of positive roots of the corresponding root system ( = number of reflections in the corresponding Weyl group). | |
| Oct 14, 2021 at 8:43 | history | became hot network question | |||
| Oct 14, 2021 at 8:31 | answer | added | Mare | timeline score: 19 | |
| Oct 14, 2021 at 4:54 | comment | added | dhy | @FZaldivar I believe that the bijection is between all positive roots and indecomposable representations (for $A_{n}$, think about the indecomposable representation assigning a $1$-dimensional representation to each vertex.) The mistake in the anecdote is that the $n+1$ should be replaced with $n(n+1)/2.$ | |
| Oct 14, 2021 at 4:40 | history | edited | José Hdz. Stgo. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 5 characters in body
|
| Oct 14, 2021 at 4:38 | comment | added | José Hdz. Stgo. | ... I have reunited the courage to pose this question because I heard it once again (or a slight variation of it) in a talk by Professor R. Bautista that took place last Friday on the ocassion of the 10th anniversary of the CCM UNAM (however, he mentioned that he might have heard it from A. Dress). | |
| Oct 14, 2021 at 4:38 | comment | added | José Hdz. Stgo. | Good night! Thank you very much for your observations. Not only am I interested in finding out whether the event actually happened but I am also looking for a more detailed formulation of the story (and of the underlying connection 'twixt the topics). The anecdote was briefly mentioned towards the end of the talk; it was more or less clear to me on that day Professor de la Peña was not worrying too much about the details while telling it... | |
| Oct 14, 2021 at 1:30 | comment | added | F Zaldivar | The story might be true, but some things don't add up. For example, the bijection is between the indecomposable representations of the quiver and the simple roots of the Lie algebra corresponding to the Dynkin diagram (in the $A_n$ type the simple roots are $n$ but the number of roots is $n(n+1)/2$). On the other hand, P. Gabriel certainly knew about Lie algebras (he is one of the collaborators for the SGA 3 volumes) and probably knew J. Tits in Paris and had cited some of his work in some paper. | |
| Oct 14, 2021 at 1:18 | history | edited | José Hdz. Stgo. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
| Oct 14, 2021 at 0:53 | history | edited | José Hdz. Stgo. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 5 characters in body
|
| Oct 14, 2021 at 0:46 | history | edited | José Hdz. Stgo. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 3 characters in body
|
| Oct 14, 2021 at 0:38 | history | asked | José Hdz. Stgo. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |