Not signed in (Sign In)

Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

  • Sign in using OpenID

Discussion Tag Cloud

Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to nForum
If you want to take part in these discussions either sign in now (if you have an account), apply for one now (if you don't).
    • CommentRowNumber1.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeApr 29th 2014

    I have split off the section on points-to-pieces transform from cohesive topos and expanded slightly, pointing also to comparison map between algebraic and topological K-theory

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeFeb 2nd 2015

    I have added to the Examples a section Bundle equivalence and concordance with a quick note on how the points-to-pieces-transform applied to an internal hom of the form [X,BG][X,\mathbf{B}G] gives the canonical map from GG-principal bundles with equivalences between them to GG-principal bundles with concordances between them.

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeFeb 27th 2018

    I noticed that at points-to-pieces transform there had been no mentioning of its incarnation in global equivariant homotopy theory; so I went and briefly added a pointer: here

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 12th 2018

    added mentioning of the condition “pieces have points” and made that phrase a redirect

    diff, v6, current

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 22nd 2018

    I had some trouble remembering, or making Google remember, where we recorded that “pieces have points” is equivalent to “discrete objects are concrete”.

    I have now made a brief remark on that here, where this is more likely to be found (hopefully). I’ll want to turn this into a more comprehensive and polished discussion, but no time right now.

    diff, v7, current