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):||3 February 2006|
|PDF File Size:||1.10 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||20.84 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
number theory – Translation for EGA/SGA – Mathematics Stack Exchange
I haven’t needed it yet, but the day might come. But why do you do it if there are so few interesting combinations of these axioms? I am by no means an expert, but I’ve found both of these useful.
The French language may be a barrier for some, but one doesn’t have to “learn French” to learn enough to understand EGA. I haven’t seen one that made it past the first few sections. He told me not to be absurd, that I should just learn techniques as I needed them for problems. Scheme theory Mathematics books History of mathematics Mathematics literature French mathematical seminars. More importantly, he is no longer with us to defend himself against this very unfair jab.
I also read some of Weil’s foundations, as well as books of Lang and some of Zariski’s papers, which helped give an appreciation of other perspectives.
Seminaire de Geometrie Algebrique
Home Questions Xga Users Unanswered. But in my experience this is much easier than reading or speaking French in any serious way, if you disregard the difficulties inherent in the mathematics.
I should say something about the French. The job of typesetting the text anew and proofreading it was then distributed among dozens of volunteers most of them junior French mathematicians, because of the required grothwndieck in French and knowledge of algebraic geometrystarting with SGA1 in late Learn what you need, do some reading for fun, and do no more.
See the history of this page for a list of all contributions to it. If you are serious about arithmetic geometry, then it is hard to avoid reading mathematical French. In response to a similar question asked on Terry Tao’s blog, I posted the following advice: Hartshorne’s book is good, but at times he considers only schemes over algebraically closed fields, where he could be more general.
And he said it was good to take a look at EGA when you need something. Views Read Edit View history.
So far the following volumes have been retyped:. In fact, we can learn most part of these materials from grothendiwck lecture course and even more categorical since he is framework grotjendieck for NCAG which is based on categoryIt is really a happy experience However, he said it was better to listen not to read. Silverman Fulton’s intersection 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. A careful reading of Hartshorne, especially the last two chapters, would be a good preparation for entering the research literature in this subject, I think.
Towards a free electronic TeX version of SGA
I had a great time in a “seminar of pain” with a number of other people who were also groothendieck reasonably happy with Hartshorne and more. I do hear that there exist Russian and Chinese translations. I think a student should try to read as much as possible from EGA and SGA, especially if he is interested in arithmetic geometry. All this come before and during reading material in your speciality, anything modern, or anything which is just plain fun.
Hartshorne, Some complex-point-of-view book e. Expanding on this it seems a lot of people seems it’s just flame: Actually, students want to read EGA. I just would like to draw your attention to what Luc Illusie, illustrious student of Grothendieck, said to Spencer Bloch in a conversation recently published in the Notices of the AMS:. Beauville or but Barth et-al All this come before and during reading material in your speciality, anything modern, or grothedieck which is just plain fun.
Some will read them later as they need facts, and will realize how beautiful they are. Somewhat more generally, I don’t think that flat descent should be the focus for most students when learning algebraic geometry.
EGA was never completed. Those who can quote chapter and verse of EGA are the best suited to doing algebraic geometry. Moreover, an attempt was made to achieve maximally general statements, while assuming that the reader is gtothendieck of the motivations and concrete examples. There must nowadays be less time-consuming ways to absorb the “required knowledge” needed to do “serious” non-arithmetic algebraic geometry. Then you revisit the same topics and, with your new and better perspective, you appreciate more of it.
Unless you have a really special interest, you shouldn’t. Some will read them later for “pleasure”, like reading the classics. Would you share with us? How will you know the difference? 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.