Timeline for Question about hereditary $C^*$-algebra
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 11, 2012 at 13:53 | vote | accept | Aviv | ||
| Mar 18, 2012 at 6:49 | vote | accept | Aviv | ||
| Mar 18, 2012 at 6:50 | |||||
| Mar 18, 2012 at 6:49 | vote | accept | Aviv | ||
| Mar 18, 2012 at 6:49 | |||||
| Feb 20, 2012 at 3:32 | comment | added | Peter Samuelson | Ah, that's unfortunate terminology, then. I guess this is evidence that the first phrase in my first sentence is correct :-) | |
| Feb 20, 2012 at 2:25 | comment | added | Aviv | Thank you for your interest in my question! Yes, the hereditary that people define in $C^*$-algebra is not the same as the hereditary that use for general algebra. | |
| Feb 20, 2012 at 1:31 | comment | added | Yemon Choi | Peter, I don't think the hereditary that you use in algebra is the same as the hereditary that people use for $C^\ast$-algebras. The latter has nothing to do with homological dimension in the Tor-Ext sense, or probably in any other sense come to think of it. | |
| Feb 19, 2012 at 20:35 | history | answered | Peter Samuelson | CC BY-SA 3.0 |