Notes for BBS/Severa-110126-095855.jpg: Difference between revisions
From Drorbn
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
(No difference)
|
Latest revision as of 10:36, 28 January 2011
For the long term it would be a sin to accept the proof of Kontsevich's vanishing lemma as it is. A simple statement should have a simple transparent proof phrased within the same language. Also, this lemma is the obstruction to re-phrasing everything as a counting argument; understanding it may uncover an underlying counting argument.