Timeline for functions satisfying "one-one iff onto"
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 17, 2012 at 23:37 | comment | added | Uday | As I stated in the question, compactness is the next best thing to finiteness' I was just wondering if we can do better. | |
| Feb 17, 2012 at 23:13 | comment | added | Donu Arapura | Compactness was used twice (1) for surjectivity and (2) RH. But I was suppose one make a different kind of statement. Is it important to you? | |
| Feb 17, 2012 at 23:01 | comment | added | Uday | Is there no way we can come out of compactness assumption? | |
| Feb 17, 2012 at 22:51 | history | edited | Donu Arapura | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 5 characters in body
|
| Feb 17, 2012 at 22:51 | comment | added | Donu Arapura | OK, no harm done. Let me edit to make clearer. | |
| Feb 17, 2012 at 22:49 | comment | added | Tommaso Centeleghe | oooops.. you are right. I misread what you wrote, I thought you were considering $f:X\rightarrow Y$..good! | |
| Feb 17, 2012 at 22:29 | comment | added | Donu Arapura | RH says $2g-2 = d(2g-2)+\sum_p (e_p-1)$ which gives the inequality I stated. Tell me which part do you not understand? | |
| Feb 17, 2012 at 22:14 | comment | added | Tommaso Centeleghe | This cannot be. I think that in your application of Riemann-Hurwitz you are assuming that your map $f$ is everywhere unramified, which is a quite strong assumption! | |
| Feb 17, 2012 at 22:00 | history | answered | Donu Arapura | CC BY-SA 3.0 |