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 formal-schemes
Search options questions only
not deleted
user 66686
2
votes
1
answer
437
views
Does $R\hat{f}_*\mathcal{F}=\hat{f}_*\mathcal{F}$ hold for affine adic morphisms?
Let $f:X\to Y$ be an affine morphism of locally Noetherian schemes. By this, we know that $Rf_*\mathcal{F}=f_*\mathcal{F}$ for any quasi-coherent sheaf $\mathcal{F}$ of $\mathcal{O}_X$-modules (the eq …
- 1,479
8
votes
0
answers
578
views
Scholze and Weinstein's $\operatorname{Spa}\mathbf{Z}_p\times \operatorname{Spa}\mathbf{Z}_p$
In their Berkeley Lectures, to motivate the introduction of Diamonds, Scholze and Weinstein discuss what should be the definition of $\operatorname{Spa}\mathbf{Z}_p\times \operatorname{Spa}\mathbf{Z}_ …
- 1,479