Timeline for A matrix algebra has no deformations?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 28, 2013 at 23:59 | history | edited | MTS | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Fixed small mistake since question came back to front page anyway.
|
| Sep 28, 2013 at 5:28 | answer | added | Peter Samuelson | timeline score: 2 | |
| Nov 17, 2011 at 17:20 | vote | accept | MTS | ||
| Nov 16, 2011 at 9:08 | answer | added | DamienC | timeline score: 17 | |
| Nov 16, 2011 at 8:26 | answer | added | Daniel Larsson | timeline score: 4 | |
| Nov 16, 2011 at 8:23 | answer | added | Andreas Thom | timeline score: 5 | |
| Nov 16, 2011 at 1:36 | comment | added | Mariano Suárez-Álvarez | While related, your questions are sufficiently different that they would —I think— be better placed in at least three separate posts. | |
| Nov 15, 2011 at 20:19 | comment | added | Vít Tuček | You might want to take a look at deformation theory lecture notes [1] and references contained therein. They treat only formal deformations but remark something along these lines: "Deformation cohomology is the cohomology of the tangent space of a smooth dg-scheme constructed from Ass(V)/GL(V)" [1] arxiv.org/abs/0705.3719 | |
| Nov 15, 2011 at 20:01 | history | asked | MTS | CC BY-SA 3.0 |