Timeline for Transversality in the proof of the Blakers-Massey Theorem. Is it necessary?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 7, 2012 at 22:37 | answer | added | Ronnie Brown | timeline score: 3 | |
| Feb 4, 2011 at 5:01 | vote | accept | John Klein | ||
| Feb 3, 2011 at 4:51 | answer | added | Jeff Strom | timeline score: 7 | |
| Feb 2, 2011 at 19:08 | answer | added | Charles Rezk | timeline score: 9 | |
| Jan 30, 2011 at 13:12 | history | edited | John Klein | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 32 characters in body; added 5 characters in body
|
| Jan 30, 2011 at 12:52 | comment | added | John Klein | @Dylan: have a look at Gray's 13.8. He is using tranversality there. | |
| Jan 30, 2011 at 4:51 | comment | added | John Klein | I think Gray works in the simply connected case. My recollection is that he does use a transversality argument, but I don't have his book available now to check that. | |
| Jan 30, 2011 at 4:19 | comment | added | Dylan Wilson | I haven't read the proof in detail, but have you seen Gray's treatment of this in his book "Homotopy Theory"? He seems to use lots of linearization- no mention of transversality. But maybe his result isn't as strong... | |
| Jan 30, 2011 at 3:22 | comment | added | Charles Rezk | A question I've often wondered about (and haven't answered). | |
| Jan 30, 2011 at 3:15 | history | asked | John Klein | CC BY-SA 2.5 |