Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below
Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
I have edited at Tychonoff theorem:
tidied up the Idea-section. (Previously there was a long paragraph on the spelling of the theorem before the content of the theorem was even mentioned)
moved the proofs into a subsection “Proofs”, and added a pointer to an elementary proof of the finitary version, here
Notice that there is an ancient query box in the entry, with discussion between Todd and Toby. It would be good to remove this box and turn whatever conclusion was reached into a proper part of the entry.
At then end of the entry there is a line:
More details to appear at Tychonoff theorem for locales
which however has not “appeared” yet.
But since the page is not called “Tychonoff theorem for topological spaces”, and since it already talks about locales a fair bit in the Idea section, I suggest to remove that line and to simply add all discussion of localic Tychonoff to this same entry.
Started lift.
weak factorization system has redirects from: lifting property, right lifting property, left lifting property, lifting problem, lifting problems.
Would it be better to have these redirect to lift?
added pointer to today’s
created quick stub for framed bicategory
but my machine's battery will die any second now...
I have added to string theory a new section Critical strings and quantum anomalies.
Really I was beginning to work on a new entry twisted spin^c structure (not done yet) and then I found that a summary discussion along the above lines had been missing.
I added a reference on Gabriel filters on quantales.
Very strange: version one on show had a reference on Etendues (entered by T. Holder), but when I clicked edit there was none in the edit window, just in show window. I edited and one can not see it in any history, nowhere. So there was something in show cache from 2014 which is not recorded in any history edit.
I gave Fourier-Mukai transform a bit of an Idea-section. It overlaps substantially with the Definition section now, but I thought one needs to say the simple basic idea clearly in words first. Also added a few more pointers to literature.
I am giving Modern foundations for stable homotopy theory a category:reference entry.
First thing I did was to brush-up the list of references at symmetric smash product of spectra. Then I copied over the nicely to-the-point History-paragraph to a new section stable homotopy theory – history.
have now spelled out at Tor in simple terms how TorAb1(A,B) is a torsion group, so far for the case that A is finite.
added to equalizer statement and proof that a category has equalizers if it has pullbcks and products
I have added
and added publication details to
and grouped together more discernibly the references on operator-algebraic entropy
added at core the remark that the core is right adjoint to the forgetful functor Grpd→Cat.
The Idea-section at quasi-Hopf algebra had been confused and wrong. I have removed it and written a new one.
Adding reference
Anonymous
Have added pointer to:
(but I haven’t more than skimmed it and don’t mean to endorse it).
Stub to record today’s reference
- Bhargav Bhatt, Peter Scholze, Prisms and Prismatic Cohomology, preprint (2019) arXiv:1905.08229
moving section on the antithesis interpretation in linear logic to its own page at antithesis interpretation
Anonymouse
Started something to record today’s article
a bare list of references, to be !include-ed into the References-sections of relevant entries (such as at supergeometry and fermion), for ease of synchronization
Create a page for this theorem (mostly copied the text from initial algebra of an endofunctor).
I have incorporated Jonas’ comment into the text at pretopos, changing the definition to “a category that is both exact and extensive”, as this is sufficient to imply that it is both regular and coherent.
I edited the formatting of internal category a bit and added a link to internal infinity-groupoid
it looks like the first query box discussion there has been resolved. Maybe we can remove that box now?
The pages apartness relation and antisubalgebra disagree about the definition of an antiideal: do we assume ¬(0∈A) or ∀p∈A,p#0? Presumably there is a similar question for antisubgroups, etc. In particular, the general universal-algebraic definition at antisubalgebra would give ¬(0∈A) as the definition (since 0 is a constant and ⊥ is a nullary disjunction), contradicting the explicit definition of antiideal later on the same page.
Does this have something to do with whether #-openness is assumed explicitly or not? The page apartness relation claims that, at least for antiideals, openness is automatic as long as the ring operations are strongly extensional. But antisubalgebra assumes openness explicitly, in addition to strong extensionality of the algebraic operations.
Finally, do we ever really need the apartness to be tight?
I have expanded and edited moment map.
A method in integrable systems.
FRT approach to quantum groups