Timeline for The "ultimate" indefinite inner product space
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 26, 2009 at 5:44 | vote | accept | Ady | ||
| Dec 26, 2009 at 5:44 | history | bounty ended | Ady | ||
| Dec 26, 2009 at 5:43 | comment | added | Ady | :-) Yes, yo do it, and you fully deserve the "bounty". I have had three hunches about V, namely : - it cannot be decomposable (hence, it cannot be Krein) - it would be of cardinality around beth_omega - it is not unique up to an isometry (even at the same cardinality). As for "asking better", can [such a] V contain a positive definite subspace whose orthogonal is {0} ? | |
| Dec 26, 2009 at 3:25 | comment | added | Greg Kuperberg | I think I patched it again? :-) | |
| Dec 26, 2009 at 3:25 | history | edited | Greg Kuperberg | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 1189 characters in body
|
| Dec 26, 2009 at 1:34 | comment | added | Ady | Hmm... Firstly, is it non-degenerate ? | |
| Dec 24, 2009 at 5:57 | comment | added | Greg Kuperberg | I think I patched it? | |
| Dec 24, 2009 at 5:57 | history | edited | Greg Kuperberg | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 531 characters in body
|
| Dec 24, 2009 at 5:31 | history | edited | Greg Kuperberg | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 91 characters in body; added 28 characters in body
|
| Dec 24, 2009 at 5:31 | comment | added | Greg Kuperberg | Yes, you are right, the construction answers a weaker question. | |
| Dec 24, 2009 at 4:45 | comment | added | Ady | Please correct me if I'm wrong, but this sounds to be merely a "local" construction, i.e. V = V(f). It's of course promising, but simply embedding all the V(f)'s as orthocomplemented subspaces ("blocks") of a huge space V would not be enough, I think [at first glance]. I mean, the "ultimate" space should be independent of any given function f. | |
| Dec 24, 2009 at 2:52 | history | answered | Greg Kuperberg | CC BY-SA 2.5 |