Torsten Schoeneberg
• Member for 10 years, 8 months
• Last seen this week
• on tour
Stats
26,902
reputation
365k
reached
737
27
questions
Communities
View all

My doctoral thesis Semisimple Lie Algebras and their classification over $$\mathfrak{p}$$-adic fields has appeared as Mémoires de la SMF 151.

Errata and remarks:

• Page 10, definition 2.1.2: Omit iii(b).
• Page 11, Remark 2.1.4i: Ignore the statement in parentheses: The analogous statement for centralisers holds too.
• Page 25, line 9: Reference (1) points to the equation at the bottom of p. 13.
• Page 46, Remark 3.1.54(ii): First parenthetical remark, cf. MO/164198. Last three lines, cf. MS/764696.
• Page 47, second line of 3.2: Omit the nonsensical "[Spr3 ... ... corrections" (leftover from an earlier draft).
• Page 53, footnote: the reference should be to exercise 16.b.
• Page 57, first line after the proof: The reference is Bo2, VIII.5.2.
• Page 68, line 2: The third reference is Sel1, IV §§1-2.
• Page 70, line 8: It should say "... if there are no arrows in its Satake-Tits diagram." (Pointed out by Prof H. Rubenthaler.)
• Page 86, second line of 4.5.1.3: Read "For $$r=\nu=\frac{1}{2}n$$, we have"
• Page 88, first line after the big matrix: Replace "$$D \setminus k$$" by "$$\mathcal{D}\mathfrak{D} = [\mathfrak{D}, \mathfrak{D}]$$".
• Page 93, fifth line of the proof: Replace "$$D \setminus k^*$$" by "$$\mathcal{D}\mathfrak{D} = [\mathfrak{D}, \mathfrak{D}]$$", and "$$r$$" by "$$r+1$$". (Pointed out by Prof. H. Rubenthaler.)
• Page 106, line 10: Replace "So $$j$$ does not divide $$n$$" by "So $$gcd(j,n) =1$$".
• Page 108: Equation (28) should be read mod $$\mathcal{O}_k^* \cdot \pi_k^{\ 2\Bbb Z}$$.
• Page 109, line 5: This equation should be read mod $$\mathcal{O}_k^* \cdot \pi_k^{\ 3\Bbb Z}$$.
• Page 113, second line after the top diagrams: Replace "$$BC_{(n+1)/2}$$" by "$$BC_{(n-1)/2}$$".
• Page 116, line 9: Replace "$$B_r$$" by "$$BC_r$$".
• Page 139, line 2: Replace "now" by "no".

J’avais passé longtemps dans l’étude des sciences abstraites et le peu de communication qu’on en peut avoir m’en avait dégoûté. Quand j’ai commencé l’étude de l’homme, j’ai vu que ces sciences abstraites ne sont pas propres à l’homme, et que je m’égarais plus de ma condition en y pénétrant que les autres en l’ignorant. J’ai pardonné aux autres d’y peu savoir, mais j’ai cru trouver au moins bien des compagnons en l’étude de l’homme et que c’est le vrai étude qui lui est propre. J’ai été trompé. Il y en a encore moins qui l’étudient que la géométrie. Ce n’est que manque de savoir étudier cela qu’on cherche le reste. Mais n’est‑ce pas que ce n’est pas encore là la science que l’homme doit avoir, et qu’il lui est meilleur de s’ignorer pour être heureux.

-- Pascal (Pensées, Lafuma 687 = Brunschwicg 144)

2
50
96
862
Score
331
Posts
43
Posts %
452
Score
196
Posts
26
Posts %
371
Score
105
Posts
14
Posts %
341
Score
121
Posts
16
Posts %
290
Score
85
Posts
11
Posts %
216
Score
64
Posts
8
Posts %
Top posts
77
Oct 21, 2019
38
Jan 31, 2021
33
Jun 11, 2019
32
May 21, 2018
29
Jul 10, 2018
28
Sep 8, 2021
18
Aug 6, 2020
15
Jun 26, 2019
13
Dec 12, 2022
Top Meta posts
1
0
Top network posts
View all network posts