Ah, thanks, that's exactly the sort of explanation I was hoping for. And after I sent my message, I thought that Gaeta's notes might be relevant (they cam be found at http://www.math.jussieu.fr/~leila/grothendieckcircle/FuncAlg.pdf) Thanks also to those that responded privately. Thomas Holder in particular pointed to further messages from Lawvere reproduced at http://mathoverflow.net/a/52894/4177 in the context of the general concept of Nullstellensatz. Best regards, David On 29 November 2014 at 00:23, Venkata Rayudu Posina <posinavrayudu@gmail.com> wrote:
The following post
http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.mathematics.categories/2228
might answer the following question:
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 10:34 PM, David Roberts <david.roberts@adelaide.edu.au> wrote:
Dear all,
in the TAC reprint 'Comments on the development of topos theory', Lawvere writes
during that [1973 stay in Buffalo, Grothendieck] also advocated the abandonment of his earlier complicated definition of 'scheme', but unfortunately the simpler alternative he offered does not seem to have found its way into the textbooks
What would this simplified definition be?
-- Dr David Roberts Research Associate School of Mathematical Sciences University of Adelaide SA 5005 AUSTRALIA [For admin and other information see: http://www.mta.ca/~cat-dist/ ]