Timeline for Difference between $\mathfrak{g}/\!/G$ and $G/\!/G$
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 12 at 1:41 | vote | accept | lafes | ||
| Aug 4, 2022 at 22:05 | comment | added | Michael Hardy |
The notation $\mathfrak{g}//G$ looks typographically weird and I changed it to $\mathfrak{g}/\!/G,$ coded as \mathfrak{g}/\!/G, but I notice that "skd" in an answer posted below was even more extreme and wrote $\mathfrak{g}/\!\!/G,$ coded as \mathfrak{g}/\!\!/G. (In URLs in LaTeX documents I've been known to write $\text{http:}/\!/\text{whatever.net}$ in preference to $\text{http:}//\text{whatever.net}$ $\qquad$
|
|
| Aug 4, 2022 at 20:58 | history | edited | Michael Hardy | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 18 characters in body; edited title
|
| Aug 4, 2022 at 11:42 | answer | added | David E Speyer | timeline score: 4 | |
| Aug 3, 2022 at 23:44 | answer | added | skd | timeline score: 16 | |
| Aug 3, 2022 at 22:37 | comment | added | lafes | @LSpice Thank you for your comment! Actually, I want to ask both cases all, any reductive $G$ and unipotent radicals $U$. So I appreciate any comments at least one of them and so your comment is very helpful for me. I will think about the case when $G$ is a torus. Thank you very much. | |
| Aug 3, 2022 at 21:35 | history | edited | LSpice | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Name of reference
|
| Aug 3, 2022 at 21:33 | comment | added | LSpice | Is your question about reductive groups $G$, or about unipotent radicals $U$ of parabolic subgroups of reductive groups? The latter are unipotent, hence never reductive (unless they are trivial). Even for reductive groups $G$, one should expect that, though $\mathfrak g//G$ and $G//G$ are related, they will differ; consider the case where $G$ is a torus! | |
| S Aug 3, 2022 at 21:28 | review | First questions | |||
| Aug 3, 2022 at 22:03 | |||||
| S Aug 3, 2022 at 21:28 | history | asked | lafes | CC BY-SA 4.0 |