# Start a new discussion

## Not signed in

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

## Site Tag Cloud

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

• CommentRowNumber1.
• CommentAuthorUrs
• CommentTimeMar 23rd 2010

added the same to Hochschild cohomology

• CommentRowNumber2.
• CommentAuthorJon Beardsley
• CommentTimeApr 8th 2014

I added a section on McCarthy and Minasian’s generalization of the HKR theorem to the setting of ring spectra.

• CommentRowNumber3.
• CommentAuthorTim_Porter
• CommentTimeApr 8th 2014
• (edited Apr 8th 2014)

The first sentence

The Hochschild-Kostant-Rosenberg theorem identifies the Hochschild homology and -cohomology of certain algebras with Kähler differentials and derivations, respectively.

reads as if something was missing. (This may be more an impression than a fact, but …)

• CommentRowNumber4.
• CommentAuthorUrs
• CommentTimeApr 8th 2014

Jon,

thanks!! Excellent that you added this.

$\,$

Tim,

I have added the word “their” to the first sentence. Does that help?

• CommentRowNumber5.
• CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
• CommentTimeApr 8th 2014

I have a feeling that Tim means a few more words like “modules of”. Acting on an instinct, I put them in, but obviously this action could be reversed if it is wrong.

• CommentRowNumber6.
• CommentAuthorUrs
• CommentTimeApr 8th 2014

Cartainly not wrong! That’s after all what it says right below in the Proposition (and of course it’s a classical textbook fact, too).

• CommentRowNumber7.
• CommentAuthorTim_Porter
• CommentTimeApr 8th 2014

Actually it was the ‘-cohomology’ that threw me. Rereading it I now understand that what is intended was Hocchschild-cohomology. (There was not a - on the homology and that confused me. I will delete the - as it does not help.)