Skip to main content

Timeline for Why are flat morphisms "flat?"

Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5

9 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jun 17, 2013 at 1:43 comment added roy smith I seem to have stumbled by accident on how to invoke TEX, just try to use dollar signs for actual dollars.
Jun 17, 2013 at 1:42 comment added roy smith when I bought mine in maybe 1967, I think the original red book was about $\$ $4. Of course Harvard tuition was only $\$ $1250 a year in 1960. –
Oct 4, 2010 at 13:39 comment added KConrad Jose, you can get the book for about $5 at biblio.mccme.ru/node/1856/shop, but the downside is that you need to read Russian. On the plus side, it is genuinely a red-colored book.
Feb 5, 2010 at 5:21 comment added Allen Knutson I assume "$10" was a way of indicating the edition.
Nov 28, 2009 at 20:53 comment added Georges Elencwajg You have an awesome eyesight, Jose. Thanks a lot for spotting this devastating Freudian slip :)
Nov 26, 2009 at 12:32 comment added Jose Capco Red Book is $10?? where do I get that? :)
Nov 25, 2009 at 22:12 comment added Andrew Critch I don't like the way people use quote (2), because although it's true that flatness was originally motivated algebraically, it demotivated me for a long time to try thinking of a geometric motivation that is meaningful a priori... now that I have one, I'm much happier, and wish someone had just said that instead! (see my answer)
Nov 25, 2009 at 14:30 comment added Georges Elencwajg Your second quote might be Mumford's remark (in his Red Book, Chapter III, $10) : "The concept of flatness is a riddle that comes out of algebra, but which technically is the answer to many prayers". I didn't know the first quote: it is very witty, thanks for posting it.
Nov 25, 2009 at 13:39 history answered user717 CC BY-SA 2.5