Timeline for "Modular forms from Feynman integrals "?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 22, 2011 at 9:01 | comment | added | Thomas Riepe | "a transition zone ... that no one has been able to identify" - sounds like a case for junq.info | |
| Jun 21, 2011 at 4:55 | vote | accept | Thomas Riepe | ||
| Jun 21, 2011 at 4:05 | comment | added | S. Carnahan♦ | Oh, I should have mentioned earlier work. Brown mentioned those results (and some others) during his talk, and said that his contribution to the knowledge of counterexamples was an explicit computationally tractable construction that used almost no technology. | |
| Jun 21, 2011 at 0:40 | comment | added | David Ben-Zvi | Nice answer! If I'm not mistaken (according to a recent talk of Marcolli) the invalidity of Kontsevich's conjecture was first found by <a href="arxiv.org/abs/math/0012198">Belkale and Brosnan</a>, who found the corresponding motives could be "arbitrarily far from mixed Tate". | |
| Jun 20, 2011 at 20:33 | comment | added | S. Carnahan♦ | I added a link under the authors' names. | |
| Jun 20, 2011 at 20:18 | history | edited | S. Carnahan♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added a link to construction of $X_G$.
|
| Jun 20, 2011 at 19:49 | comment | added | Mariano Suárez-Álvarez | Do you have a reference for the construction of $X_G$? | |
| Jun 20, 2011 at 19:47 | history | edited | S. Carnahan♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 27 characters in body
|
| Jun 20, 2011 at 19:34 | history | answered | S. Carnahan♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |