Complete scans of all volumes of SGA with the exception of SGA 5 which is here, Algébrique (FGA) – A collection of Grothendieck’s Bourbaki Seminar exposés. book “Revetements Etales et Groupe Fondamental”, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, , Springer-Verlag, , by Alexander Grothendieck et al. In French. Préfaisceaux, par A. Grothendieck et J.-L. Verdier: (original, réédition); Topologies et faisceaux, par J.-L. Verdier: (original, réédition); Fonctorialité des.
|Genre:||Health and Food|
|Published (Last):||16 May 2015|
|PDF File Size:||17.28 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||2.77 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
If not, then maybe not. It’s true that I haven’t in any real sense “read” EGA.
But this isn’t a cause of them being able to do the kind of work they do; it is an effect. There must nowadays be less time-consuming ways to absorb the “required knowledge” needed to do “serious” non-arithmetic algebraic geometry.
Seminaire de Geometrie Algebrique
Opening a volume and reading a sub-paragraph from the middle can be difficult because of all the back-references, but reading linearly can be very pleasant and rewarding. Note that there is a chapter 0 that continues at the beginning of each chapter, establishing preliminaries from topologycategory theorycommutative algebrahomological algebraetc.
Mathematics > Algebraic Geometry
While these later revisions were more widely distributed than the original fascicles, they are still uncommon outside of libraries. On the other hand, when you are trying to prove your theorems, you might well find techincal tools in them which are very helpful, so it is useful to have some sense of what is in them and what sort of tools they provide.
At the time I write this, there are a number of wise words already written here, so I’ll add just incremental thoughts. These ideas have been digested ever since. This raises the question if a student, like me, should even bother reading EGA.
The Wikipedia entry lists all of the seminars. Some will read them later for “pleasure”, like reading the classics. So you go up to a ssga DVR B by making some base extension. Learn what you need, do some reading for fun, and do no more.
aic geometry – The importance of EGA and SGA for “students of today” – MathOverflow
When I need to know where something is, I just ask someone. The LaTeX source file is available on the arXiv. Even if you want to make progress in a very gothendieck, abstract setting, you will need ideas to come from somewhere, motivated perhaps by some new phenomenon you observe in geometry, or number theory, or arithmetic, or ….
The listed volumes I-IV are just a part of the original plan. Once you learn a few standard words, like “soient” and “dans”, it’s reasonably smooth sailing. Reading the first two books of EGA with some guidance from Brian Conrad on what to skip was quite an experience I had assumed that it would be like Hartshorne, only more so, with huge heavy machinery constantly being dropped on my head. But this is less true than a generation ago.
Mark Haiman has an English version of the table of contents for EGA, which is helpful if you’re searching for something. But one thing to remember is that many very clever people have pored over the details of EGA and SGA for many years now, and it so it is going to be hard for anyone to find interesting new results that can be obtained just by applying the ideas from these sources alone as important as those ideas are. Though reading grkthendieck fully in itself might be not the best idea — there are lots of great introductions to many concepts of algebraic geometry.
I dislike these books which are written in the field of algebraic geometry. Their writing is sba synonymous with the dga of modern algebraic geometry as a field. However, I have a hard time with this point too: Gothendieck style is very abstract and makes heavy use of category theory. And the more you visit, the more pleasant it is to see things done elegantly and in full as humanly and humanely possible generality.
I don’t think I have the attention span or the time nowadays to read them front-to-back.
Otherwise, why bother having a discussion on this kind of thread? I think it will be helpful for many people, including me. To offer an alternative: Sorry, I misunderstood your original remark. But you have to be thinking about certain kind of problems, and your mind must work in a certain way.
But B tensor B over A isn’t Noetherian. I think EGAs and SGAs are not useful for “students of today” but they are indispensable for “researchers of today”, and “tomorrow”. Views Read Edit View history. That was one principle of Grothendieck: Sfa may think that you need to know everything in order to grothenrieck forward, but this is not true. How will you know the difference? Sign up or log in Sign up using Google. I’m surprised, reading the various answers and comments to this question, sgx much support there is for the idea of reading EGA.
And then they usually prefer EGA to other expository books.