Not signed in (Sign In)

Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

  • Sign in using OpenID

Discussion Tag Cloud

Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to nForum
If you want to take part in these discussions either sign in now (if you have an account), apply for one now (if you don't).
    • CommentRowNumber1.
    • CommentAuthoradeelkh
    • CommentTimeMar 2nd 2015

    new page mixed Tate motive, mostly to record some references for now

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorMarc Hoyois
    • CommentTimeMar 10th 2015

    The existence of a left adjoint is related to the Tate-Beilinson conjecture.

    I don’t know what this refers to, but Totaro proved that a left adjoint does not exist for most algebraically closed fields:

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthoradeelkh
    • CommentTimeMar 10th 2015

    In the introduction of that paper, Totaro also writes

    By contrast, the Tate-Beilinson conjecture would imply that the inclusion of DMT(k; Q) into DM(k; Q) is a Frobenius functor when k is algebraic over a finite field (Theorem 8.1). This is the strong property that the right adjoint to the inclusion is also left adjoint to the inclusion (and so there is an infinite sequence of adjoints). It is not clear what to expect when k is a number field, or when k is replaced by a regular scheme of finite type over Z.

    I edited the page to add the fact you mentioned as well.