Timeline for "Burnside ring" of the natural numbers and algebraic K-theory
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 8, 2022 at 19:20 | comment | added | LSpice | @BenjaminSteinberg's post referenced above. | |
| Apr 8, 2022 at 19:20 | history | edited | LSpice | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
`\DeclareMathOperator`; link to question
|
| Apr 8, 2022 at 13:24 | comment | added | Benjamin Steinberg | I'll add a post adding some extra info on the kernel of your map. It has a natural interpretation. | |
| Apr 8, 2022 at 13:14 | comment | added | Maxime Ramzi | @BenjaminSteinberg : yes to your first and last comments, and I don't know about your middle question | |
| Apr 8, 2022 at 13:10 | comment | added | Benjamin Steinberg | By the way I think of you map to The size of the essential range of f -the size of f^n(X) in the second coordinate you get an element of the direct sum of copies of $\mathbb Z$ which is cleaner. | |
| Apr 8, 2022 at 13:06 | comment | added | Benjamin Steinberg | Do we know that A(N) and A(Z) are not abstractly isomorphic (via some weird map)? | |
| Apr 8, 2022 at 11:05 | comment | added | Benjamin Steinberg | Under your final map any two idempotent maps with the same cardinality image are equivalent but in fact they are not equivalent in A(N). The underlying additive group is A(N) is the free abelian group on all mappings whose essential range is a single cycle | |
| Apr 8, 2022 at 9:38 | history | answered | Maxime Ramzi | CC BY-SA 4.0 |