Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with cohomology
Search options not deleted
user 128609
A branch of algebraic topology concerning the study of cocycles and coboundaries. It is in some sense a dual theory to homology theory. This tag can be further specialized by using it in conjunction with the tags group-cohomology, etale-cohomology, sheaf-cohomology, galois-cohomology, lie-algebra-cohomology, motivic-cohomology, equivariant-cohomology, ...
1
vote
0
answers
95
views
On the equivalence of two definitions of cohomological dimension for locally compact topolog...
.$ One is the usual definition $\textbf{(P)}$ : $X$ is said to have cohomological dimension $n$ if $n$ is the largest integer such that there exists a closed set $A\subset X$ with the relative Čech cohomology … But I can't say that those two cohomology groups are isomorphic when $X$ is locally compact ? …
