Learning AG from EGA?

>>8617419
One time a young student at Cambridge was studying Algebraic Geometry and stuck on a particularly difficult problem assigned to him. Meanwhile, the great A Grothendieck was to give a talk at the university and the student was not to miss it. After the talk, he sheepishly approached the wizard and asked him about the homework problem. Grothendieck mumbled "EGA Section whatever paragraph number" and the student walked away. Sure enough, upon finding the tome in the library, there was the solution to his problem, laid out in the text. The student relaid this tale to his professor, JG Thompson, for he could not now honestly write up the solution. Thompson remarked "I don't know if I should give you an F for looking it up, or an A for having the balls to ask him about it."

That students name? Richard Foote.

>>8617451
Cool, where did you get that anecdote? Also isn't Foote a (finite?) group theorist? lol

Have you read EGA? Are you basically telling me that I should be able to quote it chapter and verse like the bible?

>>8617419
I'm 95% sure reading EGA is a waste of your time. If you had a professor fluent in algebraic geometry nearby, you wouldn't be asking a board full of undergrads what to read. You probably don't have a nearby algebraic geometer so you probably aren't planning to do research in algebraic geometry, which is the only good reason to be reading EGA instead of something more accessible/less time-consuming.

Trying to filter down EGA into a barebones graduate-introduction course is stupid, especially since you'll need another book anyway to find problems.

>>8617419
Reading EGA is something you should eventually do. But after you have already learned from Hartshorne or something similar.

>>8617419
It's easier because it's more dilute, but that doesn't necessarily make it easier to learn from (I mean it would likely take you more than a PhD's worth of time to finish reading it and SGA), that's the reason there are so many other books that are more suited for grad students (Hartshorne, Härder, Voisin, Liu for example)

>>8617489
I have talked with professors and we are setting up a weekly problem session/seminar doing Hartshorne problems, but I hated Hartshorne and started reading EGA and liked it much better.

But you're right my area is not hard-core algebraic geometry. However, it is a major interest of mine and my (hopefully) future research does touch upon arithmetic geometry and algebraic groups. Let me tell you that doing algebraic groups without schemes fucking sucks.

So to recap, I don't want "barebones" course, I am planning on being thorough (I assume this will take a couple years). However, I don't want to read the parts that are considered obsolete or that have been totally superseded.

>>8617505
>>8617511
See, this is what everybody says, including some profs (they have different opinions). But, and I ask this not in a condescending way, but what of EGA have you read? Because I'm reading EGA1 it and finding it easier to read than the usual sources. It's just fucking massive.

>>8617456
>Cool, where did you get that anecdote? Also isn't Foote a (finite?) group theorist? lol

He is yeah. I took a few classes with him, which is where the anecdote is from. He had another one about Grothendieck showing up to a conference dressed like a total bum and sitting in the front and not being recognized until he was called up to give a talk, lol.

>>8617565
I have read some of EGA1 and some of SGA1. Again, I'm not saying it's a bad source. Grothendieck is an excellent mathematical writer. It's just that, as you say, it's massive and if your objective is to get up to speed and start tackling actual algebraic geometry problems, you'd be better off starting with other books, especially if you're not planning on focusing on algebraic geometry, and then read some EGA whenever you need it.
Now, if you can afford to take the time to read it, then by all means, do so.

>>8617451
>Richard Foote

Whoever that is.

>>8617799
co-author of dummit & foote

>>8618917
Here is a story of Dummit's while I'm at it.

Sometime in the early 80s or thereabouts a young and dastardly Dave Dummit was at a conference on L-functions or something like that, attended by all the great algebraic number theorists of the day, including Serre who was giving the keynote talks. In between them, there was of course tea time, and devilish Dave Dummit was sitting down for tea with a young man. They observed Serre playing chess and remarked that he was very good. Depressed Dave Dummit remarked to the young fellow "Geez, how can these guys be so good at math and also so good at everything else? It feels like we'll never be able to catch up with them you know?" The young man took a sip of tea through his British teeth and replied "You know Dave, some times the tortoise wins the race."

The young man's name? Andrew Wiles.

>>8618920
>That pilot's name? Albert Einstein

aside form this meme the stories are nice

File: Dummit-Foote.jpg (3MB, 3872x2592px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3872x2592px

>>8618925
I will see if I can remember any more good ones, but I those were the most memorable.

That and the time when Dummit tore into a really annoying girl on the second or third day of class for being a smartass because she answered a rhetorical question of his. That was unforgettable.

>>8618933
Why are these two so well known when Dummit and Foote is a retard-level algebra book?

>>8618933
I don't remember the details that well but there was a famous mathematician I spoke to once. I'm including details that are probably wrong because I'm misremembering the finer points, but anyways.. below is the spirit of the conversation.

He told a story of some young kid (believe he was in high school) that scored the highest score on the Putnam each year he took it. Think he got into Stanford for a PhD in Math. He said this guy could solve Putnam problems no one else in the department could solve, ones that even stumped other professors. He said you could give him any Putnam problem and he'd be guaranteed to solve it. Then he paused and said "He became a terrible mathematician" and laughed. I was dumbfounded and said "What?!" and the prof responded "Until you or me he never had to beat his head against the wall while solving a problem. This guy never failed. He didn't know what failure felt like. When it came time to do research, this was the first time ever in his life he wasn't successful. He didn't know what failure felt like and just quit the PhD program entirely."

At the time I remembered enough details on the guy to do a reverse google search and pretty sure I found him. If it is the guy I found then I vaguely remember him going into genetics or something like that.

>>8619027
Funny, one of my profs told me a similar story. A young assistant professor who had ranked first on every exam (rank 1st at the ENS, the agrégation, top ranking on every exam while at the ENS) and quit research after one year because it had stopped being easy (and hence enjoyable).
Apparently it's not that rare for overachievers to find themselves in a research position because it had come so easy to them all that time and realize that they just don't like math.

>>8619017
Their book is encyclopedic at the undergrad level so any prof can use it to teach algebra any way they want, hence the mass appeal and use. Versus something at that level like Artin which is a much better book but can only be used if you're heavy into linear algebra.

>>8619041
Thanks for sharing, these stories are very inspiring.