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 bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive constructive-mathematics cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration foundations functional-analysis functor galois-theory 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 limit limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad 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 stack string string-theory 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).
    • Kochmann should be Kochman:

      Presumably #Kochmann96 should be corrected to #Kochman96, but I haven’t changed this as I’m afraid I might break things.


      diff, v34, current

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

      v1, current

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

      v1, current

    • As written, I do not believe Theorem 4.1 is true. Certainly, the coreflection exists but it is unclear why the topology generated by the connected components of the open subsets of XX is in fact a locally connected space. It is only obvious that locally connected spaces are the fixed points of this construction. Either this case was being mistaken for the locally path-connected case or the mistake was made of assuming that connected subspaces of XX still need to be connected as subspaces of R(X)R(X). Looking at the literature (Gleason’s paper “Universally locally connected refinements”) this simple refinement is used to show that the coreflection exists. However, the simple refinement and coreflection don’t seem to be the same. Rather, the coreflection is only guaranteed to be the infimum (in the lattice of topologies) of locally connected topologies larger than the topology of XX.

      Jeremy Brazas

      diff, v7, 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.

    • Someone anonymous has noted that the labels in two diagrams in triangle identities are misplaced. This seems clear. As the diagrams are external, can someone edit them who has access to the original code? There seem to be other errors (e.g. a C should be a D), as well.

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

      v1, current

    • starting something on Ravenel’s spectra X(n)X(n). Nothing to be seen yet, but I need to save…

      v1, current

    • fixed a typo

      (the complex numbers appeared as “𝔹\mathbb{B}” a few lines in a row, apparently copy-and-pasted onwards)

      diff, v17, current