Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

3
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Martin, this is a useful comment, but not an answer to his question: is it possible to axiomatize the theory of local rings as a coherent theory or at least a geometric theory in the technical sense of the word. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 28, 2012 at 10:23
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ You are right. I just wanted to mention that with this axiomatization, 1+2 are fulfilled, but 3 is not. Zhen already asked specifically about the equation $R = R^* \cup \mathfrak{m}_R$ (in logical language), therefore I've added this not just as a comment. I hope it's ok ... $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 28, 2012 at 10:36
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I'm not sure your definition of $\mathfrak{m}$ is geometric/coherent. Certainly, $\exists z . \; z - x y z = 1$ is a coherent formula, but the problem is that what we want is $(\forall y. \; \exists z . \; z - x y z = 1) \vdash x \in \mathfrak{m}$, and this is not a coherent sequent. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 28, 2012 at 23:25