Timeline for Goldman symplectic form vs Weil–Petersson symplectic form
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
23 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 14 at 1:06 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Aug 16 at 0:09 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Apr 17 at 23:03 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| S Mar 26 at 18:08 | history | bounty ended | CommunityBot | ||
| S Mar 26 at 18:08 | history | notice removed | CommunityBot | ||
| Mar 18 at 22:09 | history | edited | Carlo Beenakker | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
typo in title corrected
|
| S Mar 18 at 17:07 | history | bounty started | AMath91 | ||
| S Mar 18 at 17:07 | history | notice added | AMath91 | Canonical answer required | |
| S Mar 6 at 11:03 | history | bounty ended | CommunityBot | ||
| S Mar 6 at 11:03 | history | notice removed | CommunityBot | ||
| Feb 27 at 14:35 | comment | added | LSpice |
TeX note: $\dot{\nabla}'$ \dot{\nabla}' puts the dot too high. You can force TeX to forget the extra height of the dot by using \smash: $\smash{\dot{\nabla}}'$ \smash{\dot{\nabla}}'. I have edited accordingly.
|
|
| Feb 27 at 14:34 | history | edited | LSpice | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
`\dot{\nabla}'` -> `\smash{\dot{\nabla}}'`
|
| Feb 27 at 14:07 | answer | added | Carlo Beenakker | timeline score: 0 | |
| S Feb 27 at 9:11 | history | bounty started | AMath91 | ||
| S Feb 27 at 9:11 | history | notice added | AMath91 | Canonical answer required | |
| Feb 27 at 9:10 | history | edited | AMath91 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 496 characters in body
|
| Feb 25 at 13:27 | comment | added | abx | Oops, you are right, I missed that. But what is the problem? Do you have doubts on Goldman's computation? | |
| Feb 25 at 10:28 | comment | added | AMath91 | I'm not so sure: there he says the multiplicative factor is -8. I guess it's not so clear even for you... | |
| Feb 25 at 8:04 | comment | added | abx | This is spelled out in the paper by Goldman, The symplectic nature of fundamental groups of surfaces., Adv. in Math. 54 (1984), no. 2, 200-225. In each case there is a natural choice, and there is no multiplicative factor. | |
| Feb 25 at 2:31 | history | edited | LSpice | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Teichmuller -> Teichmüller
|
| S Feb 24 at 21:01 | history | suggested | C7X | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
MathJaxify
|
| Feb 24 at 20:40 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Feb 24 at 21:01 | |||||
| Feb 24 at 19:28 | history | asked | AMath91 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |