Timeline for Representing rational homology by manifolds
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 4, 2021 at 13:59 | history | edited | YCor | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added tags, formatting
|
| Nov 2, 2011 at 17:51 | answer | added | Lost | timeline score: 0 | |
| Oct 26, 2011 at 17:57 | vote | accept | Lost | ||
| Oct 26, 2011 at 2:54 | answer | added | Sergey Melikhov | timeline score: 10 | |
| Oct 25, 2011 at 18:47 | comment | added | Dylan Wilson | Thom doesn't use spectral sequences in his original paper... | |
| Oct 25, 2011 at 17:07 | answer | added | Tom Goodwillie | timeline score: 11 | |
| Oct 25, 2011 at 16:40 | comment | added | Lost | "you mean the development of generalized homology theories using the idea of bordism? " Yes, I mean exactly that. I was once told by an algebraic topologist that once bordism was developed as a generalized homology theory the proof of Thom's result is "obvious". However, I have so far failed to construct this "obvious" argument. Perhaps it is well known? | |
| Oct 25, 2011 at 16:28 | comment | added | Tom Goodwillie | I am confused by the question. Surely Thom's proof used bordism. Maybe by "the development of bordism" you mean the development of generalized homology theories using the idea of bordism? | |
| Oct 25, 2011 at 16:21 | comment | added | Tim Perutz | "This work of Thom predates the development of bordism". That's strange thing to say, as the relevant paper of Thom ("Quelques proprietes...") is the one that introduces (co)bordism theory - and takes several giant strides in developing it. [Perhaps you're referring to the Atiyah-Hirzebruch s.s., which did come later?] | |
| Oct 25, 2011 at 14:36 | history | asked | Lost | CC BY-SA 3.0 |