Talk:Resolution of singularities
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
|||||
| Mathematics rating: | Start Class | Mid Priority | Field: Geometry | ||
| Please update this rating as the article progresses, or if the rating is inaccurate. Please also add comments to suggest improvements to the article. | |||||
The article begins thus:
-
- In algebraic geometry, the problem of resolution of singularities asks whether any algebraic variety has a non-singular model (a non-singular variety birational to it).
"Any" is often ambiguous. Does it ask
- whether there is any algebraic variety that has a non-singular model; or
- whether it is the case that any (i.e. every) algebraic variety has a non-singular model?
I don't know algebraic geometry, but I know it's not unusual for mathematicians to use "any" while overlooking this potential misunderstanding. In about 2002, the article on the compactness theorem in logic said that that theorem states that a set of sentences "has a model if any finite subset has a model". That's begging to be misunderstood! If the second meaning above was intended, then just changing "any" to "every" would fix the problem. Michael Hardy 03:48, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
This page uses the term "blowup" without first defining it. I've created a link, directed to "blowing up". Should a definition be added in this article? Michael Hardy 00:26, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
