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 cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality education elliptic-cohomology enriched 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 mathematics measure measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology multicategories 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 science 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).
    • CommentRowNumber1.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJan 17th 2020

    added textbook pointer:

    diff, v35, current

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeAug 20th 2020

    added pointer to today’s

    The introduction makes the interesting claim that the duality between geometry and commutative algebra is due to Descartes’ La Géométrie from 1637.

    I didn’t know this. What does Descartes actually say there?

    diff, v36, current

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeAug 20th 2020

    I’m pretty sure he doesn’t speak of duality. It’s a method of translating between geometry and algebra. This allows him to go beyond the Ancients and solve Pappus’s problem.

    I believed that I could borrow all that was best both in geometrical analysis and in algebra, and correct all the defects of the one by help of the other. (The Discourse on Method)

    There’s a lot of discussion at that time of what counts as a proper geometric curve. Algebra and the degree of equations helps here, but there’s little of the modern sense of a totality which could feature in a duality.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeAug 20th 2020

    Connes suggests that a full understanding of the RH will require both the notion of non-commutative space and the concept of topos (due to Grothendieck) as the ever more general definitions of what a geometric space must mean. This would entail a third paradigm shift. (Lupercio)

    Do we know what Connes takes to be what NCG brings to topos theory? Is there anything that isn’t taken up in higher topos theory?

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeAug 20th 2020
    • (edited Aug 20th 2020)

    I don’t know what that quote is after (heard some things, but don’t want to be guessing), maybe somebody else here does.

    (I had lost interest in this approach to RH after reading Connes-Bost and Connes-Marcolli. The promising geometric attack on RH seems, to me, to be Yau’s.)

    But I do know what the right unification of higher topos theory and non-commutative geometry is:

    Tabuada-style non-commutative motives, namely simply well-behaved stable \infty-categories. By the Schwede-Shipley-style theorems (here) these are \infty-categories of modules over A A_\infty-algebras(algebroids) and as such are the higher “toposes” of abelian \infty-stacks on non-commutative \infty-spaces.

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorTim_Porter
    • CommentTimeAug 20th 2020
    • (edited Aug 20th 2020)

    There is a zoom conference that may be of interest although I do not know if NCG will be mentioned: here

Add your comments
  • Please log in or leave your comment as a "guest post". If commenting as a "guest", please include your name in the message as a courtesy. Note: only certain categories allow guest posts.
  • To produce a hyperlink to an nLab entry, simply put double square brackets around its name, e.g. [[category]]. To use (La)TeX mathematics in your post, make sure Markdown+Itex is selected below and put your mathematics between dollar signs as usual. Only a subset of the usual TeX math commands are accepted: see here for a list.

  • (Help)