Timeline for Springer isomorphisms and parabolics
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 23, 2011 at 5:10 | comment | added | Chuck Hague | Oh yes, that should have been "Springer isomorphisms." Somehow I was thinking about Richardson elements and got mixed up. | |
| Dec 23, 2011 at 5:10 | history | edited | Chuck Hague | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Fixed title
|
| Dec 23, 2011 at 5:07 | vote | accept | Chuck Hague | ||
| Dec 23, 2011 at 2:17 | answer | added | George McNinch | timeline score: 5 | |
| Dec 22, 2011 at 22:28 | comment | added | Jim Humphreys |
Is "Richardson isomorphisms" in the header an oversight? Aside from that, the non-uniqueness of Springer isomorphisms (especially for exceptional root systems) needs to be built more carefully into the question, since there might be multiple maps $\phi$ of the type you consider. For the classical root systems there are explicit maps available (Cayley, etc.); have you looked at these cases? It's also good to add a reference, such as McNinch-Testerman, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 213 (2009), 1346–1363.
|
|
| Dec 22, 2011 at 19:47 | history | asked | Chuck Hague | CC BY-SA 3.0 |