Frobenius Categories versus Brauer Blocks: The Grothendieck Group of the Frobenius Category of a Brauer Block (Progress in Mathe,New

Frobenius Categories versus Brauer Blocks: The Grothendieck Group of the Frobenius Category of a Brauer Block (Progress in Mathe,New

In Stock
SKU: DADAX376439997X
Brand: Birkh
$134.39
Quantity
Add to wishlist
Add to compare

Processing time: 1-3 days

US Orders Ships in: 3-5 days

International Orders Ships in: 8-12 days

Return Policy: 15-days return on defective items

Payment Option
Payment Methods

Help

If you have any questions, you are always welcome to contact us. We'll get back to you as soon as possible, withing 24 hours on weekdays.

Customer service

All questions about your order, return and delivery must be sent to our customer service team by e-mail at yourstore@yourdomain.com

Sale & Press

If you are interested in selling our products, need more information about our brand or wish to make a collaboration, please contact us at press@yourdomain.com

I1 More than one hundred years ago, Georg Frobenius [26] proved his remarkable theorem a?rming that, for a primep and a ?nite groupG, if the quotient of the normalizer by the centralizer of anypsubgroup ofG is a pgroup then, up to a normal subgroup of order prime top, G is apgroup. Ofcourse, itwouldbeananachronismtopretendthatFrobenius, when doing this theorem, was thinking the category notedF in the sequel G where the objects are thepsubgroups ofG and the morphisms are the group homomorphisms between them which are induced by theGconjugation. Yet Frobenius hypothesis is truly meaningful in this category. I2 Fifty years ago, John Thompson [57] built his seminal proof of the nilpotencyofthesocalled Frobeniuskernelofa FrobeniusgroupGwithar ments at that time completely new which might be rewritten in terms ofF; indeed, some time later, following these kind of arguments, George G Glauberman [27] proved that, under some rather strong hypothesis onG, the normalizerNofasuitablenontrivial psubgroup ofG controls fusion inG, which amounts to saying that the inclusionN?G induces an ? equivalence of categoriesF =F .'

⚠️ WARNING (California Proposition 65):

This product may contain chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm.

For more information, please visit www.P65Warnings.ca.gov.

Recently Viewed