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

Site Tag Cloud

2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry book bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive cosmology definitions deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration foundation foundations functional-analysis functor gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry graph graphs gravity grothendieck group group-theory harmonic-analysis higher higher-algebra higher-category-theory higher-differential-geometry higher-geometry higher-lie-theory higher-topos-theory homological homological-algebra homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology nforum nlab noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pages pasting philosophy physics pro-object probability probability-theory quantization quantum quantum-field quantum-field-theory quantum-mechanics quantum-physics quantum-theory question representation representation-theory riemannian-geometry scheme schemes set set-theory sheaf simplicial space spin-geometry stable-homotopy-theory stack string string-theory superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory tqft type type-theory universal variational-calculus

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).
    • I am at the Croatian black hole school organized by Jarah Evslin, and I am partially taking care of Croatia related issues (visa, trasnportation advice. communication to the owners of the housing). Lots of interesting things here about star formation, black hole formation, making massive black holes from lighter ones and so on. And some string theory mechanisms related to black hole entropy and similar issues. Most of people are postdocs and students here. Among seniors, Holger Nielsen and Mina Aganagić are present to our benefit.

      By the way, started a stub black hole. Please contribute.

    • Added reference section.

      This page really could use some TLC.

      diff, v7, current

    • I have added at HomePage in the section Discussion a new sentence with a new link:

      If you do contribute to the nLab, you are strongly encouraged to similarly drop a short note there about what you have done – or maybe just about what you plan to do or even what you would like others to do. See Welcome to the nForum (nlabmeta) for more information.

      I had completly forgotton about that page Welcome to the nForum (nlabmeta). I re-doscivered it only after my recent related comment here.

    • Created:

      Idea

      Just like an ordinary scheme in algebraic geometry is glued from affine schemes, a C^∞-scheme in differential geometry is glued from smooth loci.

      References

      The original reference is

      • Eduardo Dubuc, C-schemes, Amer. J. Math. 103 (1981) (PDF, JSTOR).

      See the artice C^∞-ring for more references.

      v1, current

    • starting something.

      I claim that in terms of quantum circuits via dependent linear types, the principle of deferred measurement is immediately formalized and proven by the Kleisli equivalence:

      Namely a quantum circuit involving measurement in the B-basis anywhere is a Kleisli morphism Circ:B for the linear necessity-comonad, and the Kleisli equivalence says that this equals a coherent (non-measurement) quantum circuit δCirc: postcomposed with the -counit: But the latter is the measurement gate.

      v1, current

    • work in progress <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/differential+geometry+and+algebraic+geometry/1">v1</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/differential+geometry+and+algebraic+geometry">current</a>
    • It’s been 14 years, will this article end up getting the rewrite?

      Anonymouse

      diff, v15, current

    • Change 1: Original page describes the fan theorem as requiring the bar to be decidable, claims that the “classical” fan theorem contradicts Brouwer’s continuity principle. The latter claim is not true; I corrected the error. I have stated the result as two separate theorems: the decidable fan theorem, about decidable bars, and the fan theorem, about bars in general.

      Change 2: Slightly more information is provided about the relationship between the Fan Theorem and Bar Induction. Eventually, we should make a page about the latter.

      Change 3: the section on equivalents to the fan theorem has been fixed somewhat. The section originally asserted that all of the statements provided were equivalent to the decidable fan theorem; in fact, some are equivalent to the decidable fan theorem and some to the full fan theorem.

      diff, v22, current

    • brief category:people-entry for hyperlinking references

      v1, current

    • added pointer to yesterday’s

      • Jim Gates, Yangrui Hu, S.-N. Hazel Mak, Adinkra Foundation of Component Decomposition and the Scan for Superconformal Multiplets in 11D, 𝒩=1 Superspace (arXiv:2002.08502)

      diff, v13, current

    • starting page on strongly predicative dependent type theory

      Anonymouse

      v1, current

    • changed title to match more systematic naming convention

      diff, v14, current

    • brief category:people-entry for hyperlinking references

      v1, current

    • brief category:people-entry for hyperlinking references

      v1, current

    • Corrected “1-loop” to “tree-level”

      Nick Geiser

      diff, v8, current

    • starting page on Archimedean ordered fields admissible for Σ a σ-frame of propositions

      Anonymouse

      v1, current

    • starting page on σ-frame of propositions

      Anonymouse

      v1, current

    • I have expanded a bit at Serre-Swan theorem: gave it an actual Idea-section, mentioned more variants (over general ringed spaces, in higher geometry) and added more references.

    • New article class equation, just to fill some gaps in the nLab literature. Truly elementary stuff.

    • changed link for gitit from gitit.net (a yale group not related to this page) to the github page for gitit.

      mray

      diff, v14, current

    • higher order logic as a dependent type theory

      Anonymouse

      v1, current

    • this page needs attention. For the moment I have at least added these original articles:

      • Michael Atiyah, Isadore Singer, Index theory for skew-adjoint Fredholm operators, Publications Mathématiques de l’IHÉS, Tome 37 (1969) 5-26 [numdam:PMIHES_1969__37__5_0]

      • Max Karoubi, Espaces Classifiants en K-Théorie, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society 147 1 (Jan., 1970) 75-115 [doi:10.2307/1995218]

      diff, v10, current

    • added pointers:

      For superconformal field theory, such as D=4 N=1 SYM, D=4 N=2 SYM, D=4 N=4 SYM, D=6 N=(1,0) SCFT, D=6 N=(2,0) SCFT:

      • Christopher Beem, Madalena Lemos, Pedro Liendo, Leonardo Rastelli, Balt C. van Rees, The N=2 superconformal bootstrap (arXiv:1412.7541)

      • Christopher Beem, Madalena Lemos, Leonardo Rastelli, Balt C. van Rees, The (2,0) superconformal bootstrap (arXiv:1507.05637)

      • Christopher Beem, Leonardo Rastelli, Balt C. van Rees, More N=4 superconformal bootstrap (arXiv:1612.02363)

      diff, v6, current

    • Wrote a section on the associated monad at operad, in terms of the framework introduced under the section titled Preparation.

    • I am splitting off Zariski topology from Zariski site, in order to have a page for just the concept in topological spaces.

      So far I have spelled out the details of the old definition of the Zariski topology on 𝔸nk (here).

    • starting page on endomorphism monoid objects, to generalize endomorphism monoids and endomorphism rings

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • Page created, but author did not leave any comments.

      v1, current

    • Mentioned a characterisation of exponentiable multicategories.

      diff, v33, current

    • starting page on dependent type theory with type variables

      Anonymouse

      v1, current

    • tried to bring the entry orientation into a bit of shape

    • added this quote:

      Have no respect whatsoever for authority; forget who said it and instead look at what he starts with, where he ends up, and ask yourself, “Is it reasonable?”

      diff, v8, current

    • I expanded Maxwell’s equations by adding the integral form in SI system and then a shorter version of discussion from electromagnetism for the differential form of the equations, both in 3d and 4d formulations. Note also that Ampère’s law is about producing magnetic field from current; while it is Maxwell’s equation, or Ampère-Maxwell which adds the term with the change of electric field, the main discovery of Maxwell. Some people nowdays say generalized Ampère’s law what I wrote, but I am not happy about it as the general form does not generalize it in the straightforward manner, but adds new physics what needs a separate attribution.

    • I noticed only now that the entry bimodule is in bad shape and needs some attention. For the moment I have added here a mentioning of the 2-category of algebras, bimodules and intertwiners and a pointer to the Eilenberg-Watts theorem.

    • at additive functor there was a typo in the diagram that shows the preservation of biproducts. I have fixed it.

      Also formatted a bit more.

    • a stub, for the moment just so as to record pointer to Simpson 12 where “resolution of the paradox” is claimed to be achieved simply by passing from topological spaces to locales

      v1, current

    • a stub, for the moment just as to satisfy links

      v1, current

    • in order to satisfy links, but maybe really in procrastination of other duties, I wrote something at quantum gravity

    • Added more material to Boolean algebra, particularly the principle of duality and the connection to Boolean rings, and a wee bit of material on Stone duality.

      Stone duality deserves greater expansion, bringing out the dualities via ambimorphic (ahem, schizophrenic) structures on the 2-element set, and mentioning the connection to Chu spaces. Another day, another dollar.

    • brief category:people-entry for hyperlinking references

      v1, current

    • I’ll be working a bit on supersymmetry.

      Zoran, you had once left two query boxes there with complaints. The second one is after this bit of the original entry (this will change any minute now)

      The theory of supergravity is, as a classical field theory, an action functional on functions on a supermanifold X which is invariant under the super-diffeomorphism group of X.

      where you say

      Zoran: action functional is on paths, even paths in infinitedimensional space, but not on point-functions.

      I think you got something mixed up here. If X is spacetime, a field on X is the “path” that you want to see. The statement as given is correct, but I’ll try to expand on it.

      The second complaint is after where the original entry said

      many models that suggest that the familiar symmetry of various action functionals should be enhanced to a supersymmetry in order to more properly describe fundamental physics.

      You wrote:

      This is doubtful and speculative. There are many models which have supersymmetry which is useful in their theoretical analysis, but the same models can be treated in formalisms not knowing about supersymmetry. Wheather the fundamental physics needs a model which has nontrivial supersymmetry is a speculative statement, and I disagree with equating theoretical physics with one direction in “fundamental physics”. I do not understand how can a model suggest supersymmetry; it is rather experimental evidence or problems with nonsupersymmetric models. Also one should distinguish the supersymmetry at the level of Lagrangean and the supersymmetry which holds only for each solution of the equation of motion.

      I’ll rephrase the original statement to something less optimistic, but i do think that supersymmetry is suggsted more by looking at the formal nature of models than by lookin at the nature of nature. If you have a gauge theory for some Lie algebra (gravity, Poincaré Lie algebra) and the super extension of the Lie algebra has an interesting classification theory (the super Poincar´ algebra) then it is more th formalist in us who tends to feel compelled to investigate this than the phenomenologist. Supersymmetry is studied so much because it looks compelling on paper. Not because we have compelling phenomenological evidence. On the contrary.

      So, if you don’t mind, I will remove both your query boxes and slightly polish the entry. Let’s have any further discussion here.