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-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry beauty bundle bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion 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 digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched etcs fibration 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 lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic manifolds mathematics measure measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology 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 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).
    • changed broken website link to new departmental entry. Note the name change, some redirection may be useful.

      diff, v2, current

    • I worked on brushing up (infinity,1)-category a little

      • mostly I added in a section on homotopical categories, using some paragraphs from Andre Joyal's message to the CatTheory mailing list.

      • in this context I also rearranged the order of the subsections

      • I removed in the introduction the link to the page "Why (oo,1)-categories" and instead expanded the Idea section a bit.

      • added a paragraph to the beginning of the subsection on model categories

      • added the new Dugger/Spivak references on the relation between quasi-cats and SSet-cats (added that also to quasi-category and to relation between quasi-categories and simplicial categories)

    • there had been no references at Hilbert space, I have added the following, focusing on the origin and application in quantum mechanics:

      • John von Neumann, Mathematische Grundlagen der Quantenmechanik. (German) Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. Berlin, Germany: Springer Verlag, 1932.

      • George Mackey, The Mathematical Foundations of Quamtum Mechanics A Lecture-note Volume, ser. The mathematical physics monograph series. Princeton university, 1963

      • E. Prugovecki, Quantum mechanics in Hilbert Space. Academic Press, 1971.

    • There’s a paper out characterising the category of continuous linear functions between Hilbert spaces

      • Chris Heunen, Andre Kornell, Axioms for the category of Hilbert spaces (arXiv:2109.07418)

      But Hilb concerns short linear maps between Hilbert spaces. Should we have a page for the former category?

    • brief category:people-entry for hyperlinking references at PU(ℋ)

      v1, current

    • I created homotopy extension property and homotopy lifting property. If somebody wonders why I made identical copy of one of them on my personal nlab part is because there I want to keep conservative page for students and here in the main nlab I expect more vigorous extensions by others. On the other hand, I would like to have under homotopy lifting property mention of various variants like "soft map" homotopy lifting property, the homotopical variant of Dold etc. all in one place.

    • starting something, with a hat-tip to Charles Rezk

      v1, current

    • (Hi, I’m new)

      I added some examples relating too simple to be simple to the idea of unbiased definitions. The point is that we often define things to be simple whenever they are not a non-trivial (co)product of two objects, and we can extend this definition to cover the “to simple to be simple case” by removing the word “two”. The trivial object is often the empty (co)product. If we had been using an unbiased definition we would have automatically covered this case from the beginning.

      I also noticed that the page about the empty space referred to the naive definition of connectedness as being

      “a space is connected if it cannot be partitioned into disjoint nonempty open subsets”

      but this misses out the word “two” and so is accidentally giving the sophisticated definition! I’ve now corrected it to make it wrong (as it were).

    • added a second equivalent definition at quasi-category , one that may be easier to motivate

    • The cut rule for linear logic used to be stated as

      If ΓA\Gamma \vdash A and AΔA \vdash \Delta, then ΓΔ\Gamma \vdash \Delta.

      I don’t think this is general enough, so I corrected it to

      If ΓA,Φ\Gamma \vdash A, \Phi and Ψ,AΔ\Psi,A \vdash \Delta, then Ψ,ΓΔ,Φ\Psi,\Gamma \vdash \Delta,\Phi.

    • Page created and some notes added

      v1, current

    • essentially just a stub entry, for the moment just to make links work

      v1, current

    • typo list: - closed $ for page rendering about 60% through file - invalid mathcal(G)


      diff, v32, current

    • wrote a definition and short discussion of covariant derivative in the spirit of oo-Chern-Weil theory

    • The cube diagram on this page is MIA, in case anyone feels like investing a few minutes of tikzcd fun to fix it.

      diff, v14, current

    • edited classifying topos and added three bits to it. They are each marked with a comment "check the following".

      This is in reaction to a discussion Mike and I are having with Richard Williamson by email.

    • Slighly adjusted the lead-in of this page: Added a line on what the book is actually about, and moved the line advertizing how great this is to after that.

      Added the line:

      The approach is echoed in Riehl & Verity 13 with Cat enhanced to the homotopy 2-category of (∞,1)-categories.

      Also touched some wording further below (“is very difficult to read” \mapsto “may be difficult to read”)

      and added the missing cross-link with John Gray (1)

      Finally, I made “formal category theory” a redirect to this page (this would deserve to point to a dedicated page, but as long as that doesn’t exit, it’s good to have it redirect here)

      diff, v9, current

    • A stub to record findings from wondering whether such a thing exists.

      v1, current

    • a stub entry, for the moment just to record some references

      v1, current

    • Added a reference to the following which provides a proof of the Arnold conjecture

      • Mohammed Abouzaid, Andrew J. Blumberg, Arnold Conjecture and Morava K-theory, (arXiv:2103.01507)

      diff, v24, current

    • Entry on lattice ordered groups. Work in progress.

      v1, current

    • made explicit (here) that simplicial \infty-colimits are \infty-sifted

      diff, v3, current

    • added the previously missing pointer to HTT for the statement that Δ op\Delta^{op} is \infty-sifted.

      diff, v6, current

    • Karoubian category

      Added the definitions of Karoubian category and Karoubi envelope that appear in (an exercise in) SGA 4.

      A stupid question: why do they call that difference kernel the image of p? In what sense is it the image?

    • I was a bit confused about a search for “pullback lemma” not returning any result, hence this redirect

      diff, v7, current

    • Created to give active reference link.

      v1, current

    • Added some remark on the order of a semiring. Actually, does anybody know if any semiring embedds into a semifield?

      diff, v5, current

    • Page to complete stubs on residuated things (more could be added).

      v1, current

    • New entry to complete references.

      v1, current

    • Entry to fill in some of the ideas from a poset viewpoint. Note the use of the term ’residual’ for the left adjoint. It seems that this use is really traditional coming from the sense that a ’residue’ is the bit left ove. The link with ‘internal homs’ is then a categorication of that, which puts a different light on internal homs!

      v1, current

    • I had started an entry “exponentiation” but then thought better of it and instead expanded the existing exponential object: added an examples-section specifically for SetSet and made some remarks on exponentiation of numbers.

    • Started an article on monoidal monad. An earlier redirect had sent it over to Hopf monad which is something that Zoran was working on, but I think it deserves an article to itself, with discussion of the relation to commutative monads, etc. (which I have started).

    • at internal hom the following discussion was sitting. I hereby move it from there to here

      Here's some discussion on notation:

      Ronnie: I have found it convenient in a number of categories to use the convention that if say the set of morphisms is hom(x,y)hom(x,y) then the internal hom when it exists is HOM(x,y)HOM(x,y). In particular we have the exponential law for categories

      Cat(x×y,z)Cat(x,CAT(y,z)).Cat(x \times y,z) \cong Cat(x,CAT(y,z)).

      Then one can get versions such as CAT a(y,z)CAT_a(y,z) if y,zy,z are objects over aa.

      Of course to use this the name of the category needs more than one letter. Also it obviates the use of those fonts which do not have upper and lower case, so I have tended to use mathsf, which does not work here!

      How do people like this? Of course, panaceas do not exist.

      Toby: I see, that fits with using CAT\CAT as the 22-category of categories but Cat\Cat as the category of categories. (But I'm not sure if that's a good thing, since I never liked that convention much.) I only used ’Hom’ for the external hom here since Urs had already used ’hom’ for the internal hom.

      Most of the time, I would actually use the same symbol for both, just as I use the same symbol for both a group and its underlying set. Every closed category is a concrete category (represented by II), and the underlying set of the internal hom is the external hom. So I would distinguish them only when looking at the theorems that relate them, much as I would bother parenthesising an expression like abca b c only when stating the associative law.

      Ronnie: In the case of crossed complexes it would be possible to use Crs *(B,C)Crs_*(B,C) for the internal hom and then Crs 0(B,C)Crs_0(B,C) is the actual set of morphisms, with Crs 1(B,C)Crs_1(B,C) being the (left 1-) homotopies.

      But if GG is a groupoid does xGx \in G mean xx is an arrow or an object? The group example is special because a group has only one object.

      If GG is a group I like to distinguish between the group Aut(G)Aut(G) of automorphisms, and the crossed module AUT(G)AUT(G), some people call it the actor, which is given by the inner automorphism map GAut(G)G \to Aut(G), and this seems convenient. Similarly if GG is a groupoid we have a group Aut(G)Aut(G) of automorphisms but also a group groupoid, and so crossed module, AUT(G)AUT(G), which can be described as the maximal subgroup object of the monoid object GPD(G,G)GPD(G,G) in the cartesian closed closed category of groupoids.

      Toby: ’But if GG is a groupoid does xGx \in G mean xx is an arrow or an object?’: I would take it to mean that xx is an object, but I also use BG\mathbf{B}G for the pointed connected groupoid associated to a group GG; I know that groupoid theorists descended from Brandt wouldn't like that. I would use xArr(G)x \in \Arr(G), where Arr(G)\Arr(G) is the arrow category (also a groupoid now) of GG, if you want xx to be an arrow. (Actually I don't like to use \in at all to introduce a variable, preferring the type theorist's colon. Then x:Gx: G introduces xx as an object of the known groupoid GG, f:xyf: x \to y introduces ff as a morphism between the known objects xx and yy, and f:xy:Gf: x \to y: G introduces all three variables. This generalises consistently to higher morphisms, and of course it invites a new notation for a hom-set: xyx \to y.)

      continued in next comment…

    • created equivariant de Rham cohomology with a brief note on the Cartan model.

      (I seem to remember that we had discussion of this in the general context of Lie algebroids elsewhere already, several years back. But now I cannot find it….)

    • Added:

      Nobuo Yoneda (kanji: 米田, 信夫, katakana: ヨネダ, ノブオ) was a Japanese mathematician.

      He got his PhD degree in 1961 from the University of Tokyo, supervised by Shokichi Iyanaga.

      diff, v4, current

    • starting an entry, for the moment mainly in order to record the fact that “crossed homomorphisms” are equivalently homomorphic sections of the corresponding semidirect product group projection. This is obvious, but is there a reference that makes it explicit?

      v1, current