Skip to main content
a minor typo
Source Link
Martin Sleziak
  • 4.7k
  • 4
  • 35
  • 40

As far as I know, If you consider the corresponding categories as Tannakian categories, they are not isomophicisomorphic, for you can rediscover the group from the Tannakian category (as its fundamental gp?)

As far as I know, If you consider the corresponding categories as Tannakian categories, they are not isomophic, for you can rediscover the group from the Tannakian category (as its fundamental gp?)

As far as I know, If you consider the corresponding categories as Tannakian categories, they are not isomorphic, for you can rediscover the group from the Tannakian category (as its fundamental gp?)

Source Link
hyh
  • 31
  • 1

As far as I know, If you consider the corresponding categories as Tannakian categories, they are not isomophic, for you can rediscover the group from the Tannakian category (as its fundamental gp?)