Timeline for Vague question on $Pic^0$
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 22, 2011 at 8:37 | comment | added | diverietti | You are right. But since here I was looking just at the dimensions of the spaces this does not modify very much my answer. I'll correct slightly my answer, then. Thank you anyway! | |
| Apr 22, 2011 at 8:26 | history | edited | diverietti | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 35 characters in body; added 52 characters in body
|
| Apr 21, 2011 at 23:19 | comment | added | Francesco Polizzi | The abelianization of $\pi_1(X)$ is $H_1(X, \mathbb{Z})$, not $H^1(X, \mathbb{Z})$. For instance, if $X$ is an Enriques surface, one has $H^1(X, \mathbb{Z})=0$ but $H_1(X, \mathbb{Z})=\pi_1(X)=\mathbb{Z}_2$. | |
| Apr 21, 2011 at 22:21 | history | edited | diverietti | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 869 characters in body; added 1 characters in body
|
| Apr 21, 2011 at 21:31 | history | answered | diverietti | CC BY-SA 3.0 |