Skip to main content
Spencer Dembner's user avatar
Spencer Dembner's user avatar
Spencer Dembner's user avatar
Spencer Dembner
  • Member for 5 years, 7 months
  • Last seen this week
comment
Counterexample to flat base change for $\mathcal{O}_X$-modules
Sorry, misspoke. Thanks for the correction
revised
Loading…
revised
Loading…
Loading…
awarded
awarded
comment
PAC and totally real fields
Thanks, this is very nice
accepted
awarded
asked
Loading…
comment
Is the "naive" version of Chevalley's theorem still true?
I emailed Johan de Jong about this question and he gave an example which you can find here: github.com/stacks/stacks-project/commit/….
comment
Is the "naive" version of Chevalley's theorem still true?
@JasonStarr probably I'm miscalculating, but won't the image of that set be (naively) constructible? Let A be the locally closed locus cut out by $(x_i - x_j)$ for all i, and $x_1 \neq 0$. Let $B$ be the closed locus cut out by $(x_i - x_j)(x_j - x_k)(x_i - x_k)$ for all triples $i,j,k$ of distinct indices. Let $C$ be the open locus which is the union, over all $i \neq j$, of the locus where $x_i \neq x_j, x_i \neq 0, x_j \neq 0$. Then I think your image set is $A \cup (B \cap C)$.
Loading…
awarded
awarded
comment
Is this theory the complete theory of the real ordered field?
@EmilJeřábek yes, that's what I had in mind (and as you said, it extends to subfields of $\mathbb{R}$ but maybe not further).
revised
Loading…
awarded
comment
Is this theory the complete theory of the real ordered field?
@user107952 no, unfortunately the argument doesn't work because of the issue Emil brought up.