|
changed the proof
|
2011-08-13 |
4ea0b65 |
Whitespace changes
|
|
changed the statement and the proof
|
2011-08-13 |
a2054b4 |
LaTeX: get rid of useless brackets
|
|
changed the proof
|
2011-08-11 |
4c15ebf |
LaTeX: \Ob
Introduced a macro
\def\Ob{\mathop{\rm Ob}\nolimits}
and replaced any occurence of \text{Ob}( with \Ob(. There are
still some occurences of \text{Ob} but these are sets, not the
operator that takes the set of objects of a category.
|
|
changed the statement and the proof
|
2011-06-28 |
40aae13 |
End section minimal and tangent space
This could be explained more clearly, but at least it is
consistent and correct.
|
|
changed the statement and the proof
|
2011-06-28 |
5c0fbf7 |
Versal formal objects
Now we've got uniqueness of versal formal object (correct
statement in the correct generality). This introduces a
different notion of minimality from before -- one which doesn't
look at what happens on tangent spaces. The result later is then
going to be that minimality can be read off from what happens on
tangent spaces, provided we have (S2).
|
|
changed the proof
|
2011-06-25 |
23cc5e3 |
Unstuck!
We slightly changed (S2) halfway back to where it was before and
now everything works (sofar).
|
|
changed the proof
|
2011-06-25 |
1420ed2 |
And now we're stuck!
Our change in part 2 of (S2) was too radical. We changed both
the assumption and the conclusion and we should have only
changed to assumption... because currently (S2) is different
from the original version even in the case of a predeformation
category, contrary to what we said in commit
7ab110e3348cb10d7368abe7d79229c34d13c3bf.
Thus we will back up, change (S2) once more, and review all the
lemmas involving (S2) to make sure they are still OK.
|
|
changed the proof
|
2011-06-24 |
7ab110e |
Schlessinger's conditions
I changed the condition (S2) because for non predeformation
categories the condition just wasn't the right one (as far as I
can tell). This has already been a bit of a bore, but hopefully
it will not be too bad. In particular, if F is a predeformation
category then the new condition is equivalent to the old
condition...
|
|
changed the statement
|
2011-06-23 |
a6df7f9 |
Cofibered in groupoids
Formal section with only category theory.
|
|
changed the statement and the proof
|
2011-06-23 |
5dd8964 |
The category C_\Lambda
This turned out to be quite a bit more interesting than I had
at first imagined. Can you do this without appealing to the
naive cotangent complex? I am sure you can, but how much longer
would it be...? Patches welcome.
|
|
assigned tag 06IV
|
2011-06-01 |
95db5d6
|
Tags: Added new tags
Due to the new material in the chapter on deformation theory.
|
|
created statement with label lemma-miniversal-object-existence-1 in formal-defos.tex
|
2011-06-01 |
ae2f687 |
New chapter on formal deformation theory
Written by Alex Perry.
|