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.

Author: Arashiramar Fenrizahn
Country: Latvia
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Automotive
Published (Last): 5 January 2008
Pages: 432
PDF File Size: 4.87 Mb
ePub File Size: 18.45 Mb
ISBN: 384-4-38574-182-5
Downloads: 84078
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Nikogrel

There is just so much stuff there that is not available anywhere else. Much of what I might say was already said by Matt Emerton. This site is running on Instiki 0. It’s not clear to me that one gains more essential background by reading EGA. Instead, each statement was small and trivial, yet they inexorably added up to something incredibly powerful.

Though he had a clear general picture, it was easy to go astray. A small part of EGA I’ve read in detail. I should say something about the French. Retrieved from ” https: By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of serviceprivacy policy and cookie policyand that your continued use grotheneieck the website is subject to these policies.

The language in EGA and SGA uses a very restricted vocabulary and simple sentence structure, so you don’t run into the sort of elaborate turns of phrase you’d find in e. Mathematics Stack Exchange works best with JavaScript enabled. For people who tend toward my sort of use-case, it is probably good to be sufficiently familiar with these works to recognize questions that might be answered in them, but not necessarily able to quote chapter and verse.


Stacks project is a good source for learning AG, but the best and excellent one source are A. Griffith and Harris or Gunning’s books Something from an arithmetic point of view e. Expanding on this it seems a lot of people seems it’s just flame: How will you know the difference?

aic geometry – The importance of EGA and SGA for “students of today” – MathOverflow

His constructions are “morally wrong” but “technically correct” see his construction of the structure sheaf or the sheafification. I don’t take a position as extreme as that. The published part of EGA is in Publ.

First you skim the subjects to have a general idea and to orient yourself. I’d say a third of my grothenideck have a good facility with EGA and possibly parts of SGA, and the rest wouldn’t have looked at them; it depends on what they think about.

Opening a volume and reading a sgw from the middle can be difficult because of all the back-references, but reading linearly can be very pleasant and rewarding.

All this come before and during reading material in your speciality, anything modern, or anything which is just plain fun. I’m surprised, reading the various answers and comments to this question, how much support there is for xga idea of reading EGA. So what are you to do? If you are serious about arithmetic geometry, then it is hard to avoid reading mathematical French.

Mathematics > Algebraic Geometry

wga I mean there would be a sentence and then a seven-digit number It depends on what you are working on.

I dislike Hartshorne’s book immensely. Sign up or log in Sign up using Google.

He told me not to be absurd, that I should just learn techniques as Grothendieco needed them for problems. I suppose I end up giving a rather mushy answer; if reading EGA appeals to grothendiefk, then you will probably be drawn to the kind of problems where it’s essential that you’ve read EGA.


This page was last edited on 20 Juneat The seminar notes were eventually published in twelve volumes, all except one in the Springer Lecture Notes in Mathematics series. But I think their grothendiec, has driven people away from algebraic geometry, because they give a misleading impression of the flavor of the subject.

I have examined all these books for learning Ag such as Hartshorne’s book but grotehndieck eventually I learned almost nothing from these books then I had to try other books which are written in the field of algebraic geometry, but unfortunately these books also had the same result as Hartshorne’s book.

Though reading it fully in itself might be not the best idea — there are lots of great introductions to many concepts of algebraic geometry. Now, I’m able to read math sources in french easily.

Otherwise, why bother having a discussion on this kind of thread? So EGAs are perhaps for the visit 3, or 4.

In response to a similar question asked on Terry Tao’s blog, I posted the following advice: You want to be able to do exercises, then answer questions, then ask questions, then do something new. The reputation for difficulty is, I think, unfounded. EGA can be a hard read, but it is also more complete than Hartshorne. Perhaps students should be encouraged to dip into EGA a little, to realize that it isn’t scary, just long, so when they really need it, they won’t be fearful.