3

I would like to know about the reasons (I mean, methodological reasons, not just a penchant for innovation in terminology) for Pierre Gabriel to make use of quivers. Is it fair to say he wanted to account, through such representation, for finite-dimensional associative algebras? Which reasons can you name?

Thanks in advance.

Javier Arias
  • 2,093
  • 1
    The question has an answer on MathOverflow. It quotes Gabriel: ‘Für einen solchen $4$-Tupel schlagen wir die Bezeichnung Köcher vor, und nicht etwa Graph, weil letzerem Wort schon zu viele verwandte Begriffe anhaften.’ (For such a $4$-tuple we suggest the name quiver, rather than graph, since too many related concepts are already attached to the latter word.) – Brian M. Scott Nov 18 '15 at 10:12
  • 1
    @Brian M. Scott I know he wanted to avoid confusions with the term graph....but what I want to know is what he wanted to used them for? For finite-dimensional associative algebras, o for other kinds of mathematical objects? – Javier Arias Nov 18 '15 at 10:14
  • This answer (especially the first paragraph) seems to be what you are looking for. – Pierre-Guy Plamondon Apr 08 '16 at 16:10
  • Thanks....I will have a look at it..... – Javier Arias Apr 08 '16 at 22:14

0 Answers0