Timeline for Finite flat maps
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 31 at 8:58 | vote | accept | Jakob | ||
| Oct 30 at 12:05 | comment | added | Z. M | Thanks a lot. I guess that I confuse myself with the fact that finitely generated modules over a local ring are necessarily free, which does not seem to be a consequence of Nakayama's lemma (but the Grayson–Raynaud criterion is not necessary for this either). | |
| Oct 30 at 7:32 | comment | added | Laurent Moret-Bailly | @Z.M See for example stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/00NX (proof that (1) implies (6)). | |
| Oct 29 at 18:42 | comment | added | Z. M | How does local freeness of finitely presented flat modules follow from Nakayama's lemma? I remember an exercise in Atiyah–Macdonald but it assumes Noetherianness. On the other hand, it does follow from Grayson–Raynaud criterion of projectivity (a Mittag–Leffler countably generated flat module is projective), but the proof of this criterion is complicated. | |
| Oct 29 at 14:29 | history | answered | Laurent Moret-Bailly | CC BY-SA 4.0 |