Talk:Hessenberg variety

Latest comment: 6 years ago by 67.198.37.16 in topic Relation to Hessenberg matrix?

Typoes edit

There are some typos here that an expert should have no difficulty rectifying, but as a non-expert they threw me, to the extent that I'm reluctant to make changes myself in case I've misunderstood the intention.

  • The definition of a flag on the flag variety page is an increasing sequence of subspaces, so the explanation of   in terms of the first   vectors in   is offputting. Is what is meant simply  , the  -th term in the sequence  ?
  • In the defining equation of  , presumably the   should be  , and   should be  .
  • In the defining inequality for  , should   perhaps be  ?

Thanks! Andrewbt (talk) 05:48, 28 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

Relation to Hessenberg matrix? edit

This article was linked to from Hessenberg matrix article, but there is no mention of how it is related, except for the sentence "first motivated by questions in numerical analysis in relation to algorithms for computing eigenvalues and eigenspaces of the linear operator X."

May be it can be touched upon further? - Syockit (talk) 17:54, 20 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

Well, its obviously "upper triangular", isn't it? What more is there to say? 67.198.37.16 (talk) 10:48, 29 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Does the h given define a function? edit

If the function is supposed to be a map from tuples to tuples then are the domain and range correct? Does that single map define the function for h? That is, can it be literally any map from a n-tuple to another n-tuple? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:EA00:107:2401:A16C:C48F:501B:41CA (talk) 16:40, 11 April 2017 (UTC)Reply