Not signed in (Sign In)

Start a new discussion

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-categories 2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry bundles calculus categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-theory cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics comma complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry differential-topology digraphs duality education elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration finite foundations functional-analysis functor galois-theory gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry graph graphs gravity grothendieck 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 infinity integration integration-theory k-theory lie lie-theory limit limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal-logic model model-category-theory monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology multicategories nonassociative noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pasting philosophy physics planar 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 string string-theory subobject superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory 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).
    • Added in the formula giving the associated crossed complex from the Moore complex of the simplicial group(oid).

      diff, v9, current

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

      v1, current

    • Because of the algebraic Kan complex entry I had a look at the simplicial T-complex page. I am not sure that the current page is quite right in its wording. It is a bit the age old problem of structure or properties. In the algebraic Kan complex, the filler choice function is part of the structure. In a T-complex the thin elements form part of the structure but then properties of the thin elements show that there is a unique choice function taking thin values. They then satisfy some equational conditions.

      My thought would be that there should be a bit more precision on the differences between them. For instance I think it is true (but I would need to prove it in detail) that any simplicial T-complex gave an algebraic Kan complex, yielding an ’inclusion functor’ from SimpT to Alg Kan. That functor should have a left adjoint which kills off the Whitehead products etc, (that need not be trivial for an algebraic Kan complex but are for a simplicial T-complex). I do not see how to construct this explicitly but am sure there must be a simple way of imposing conditions on an alg. Kan complex and looking at ’varieties’ in that category. (I have not read Thomas’s thesis and he may have done something related to this already.) In other words, can one impose equations on alg. Kan complexes, in this way. The present definition is more or less the free algebras case (?).

      Before altering the simp. T-complex page, I thought it worth asking this question of ’varieties’ as the answer (if it is known) would influence how best to do the edit.

    • Thomas's guest post at cafe and his paper should maybe be reflected in entry infinity-category and other places in nlab where various "models" fro infinity categories are listed, as it should have a very important role in my opinion, but still better experts should do carefully these changes. I might give a slightly uninformed interepretation of the role of this work in comparison to the experts like Mike.

    • some minimum, for the moment just so as to record the recent results by the FIRE-2 computer simulation

      v1, current

    • added to Grothendieck construction a section Adjoints to the Grothendieck construction

      There I talk about the left adjoint to the Grothendieck construction the way it is traditionally written in the literature, and then make a remark on how one can look at this from a slightly different perspective, which then is the perspective that seamlessly leads over to Lurie's realization of the (oo,1)-Grothendieck construction.

      There is a CLAIM there which is maybe not entirely obvious, but straightforward to check. I'll provide the proof later.

    • I don’t think we had this page before, at least I couldn’t find it anywhere.

      v1, current

    • I have given Grothendieck construction for model categories its own entry, in order to have a place for recording references. In particular I added pointer to the original references (Roig 94, Stanculescu 12)

      (There used to be two places in the entry Grothendieck construction where an attempt was made to list the literature on the model category version, but they didn’t coincide and were both inclomplete. So I have replaced them with pointers to the new entry.)

    • started a bare minimum at Poisson-Lie T-duality, for the moment just so as to have a place to record the two original references

    • Hello,

      I noticed DFT page has not been updated in a while and I added a couple of sections: some sketchy introductory material (analogy between Kaluza-Klein and DFT) and a little insight about a more rigorous geometrical formulation of DFT.

      It is still quite sketchy but I would be happy to refine it.

      PS: this is my first edit, I hope I played by the rules. And thank you all for this wiki

      Luigi

      diff, v7, current

    • I have spelled out the proofs that over a paracompact Hausdorff space every vector sub-bundle is a direct summand, and that over a compact Hausdorff space every topological vector bundle is a direct summand of a trivial bundle, here

    • a minimum, for the moment just so as to record some references on Pin(2)Pin(2)-equivariant homotopy theory (as kindly pointed out by David Roberts)

      v1, current

    • Added in the usual group presentation of the dihedral group D 2nD_{2n} plus a warning that this group is also denoted D nD_n by some authors (including myself!!!)

      diff, v16, current

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

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • added a line on Pin ±(n)Pin_\pm(n), and added pointer to the example of Pin(2)

      diff, v5, current

    • started a stubby nPOV-description at the beginning of BV-BRST formalism

      somebody please stop me, though, because I urgently need to be doing something else... :-)

    • I gave the entry logical relation an Idea-section, blindly stolen from a pdf by Ghani that I found on the web. Please improve, I still don’t know what a “logical relation” in this sense actually is.

      Also, I cross-linked with polymorphism. I hope its right that “parametricity” may redirect there?

    • trying to collect references on the state-of-the-art of computer simiulations on cosmic structure formations. Will try to expand as I find more…

      v1, current

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

      v1, current

    • started a minimum at M-wave

      (I was after the kind of statement as cited by Chu-Isono there, but have added now a minimum of the background literature, too).

    • added references for higher curvature corrections in 11d supergravity

      diff, v5, current