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 accessible adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration foundation 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 history homological homological-algebra homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology newpage nlab noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number 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 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).
  1. The induced map most likely isn’t a homeomorphism when X,YX, Y are locally compact Hausdorff.

    The original statement was in monograph by Postnikov without proof.

    Not only that, in the current form it couldn’t possibly be true, since the map could lack to be bijective.

    For more details see here: .

    I’ve added a reference in the case when X,YX, Y are compact Hausdorff though.


    diff, v13, current

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeDec 22nd 2020

    Thanks for the correction at the end, Adam (it was a simple oversight from whoever wrote that). I would have expected that the statement you are talking (this is in the context of pointed spaces and maps) would go through assuming XX is locally compact, but I’ll have a closer look.

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeDec 23rd 2020
    • (edited Dec 23rd 2020)

    Following on #2, let me try to say a few things. According to Cagliari, if XX is a pointed space, then

    X:Top *Top *X \wedge -: Top_\ast \to Top_\ast

    preserves colimits provided that X×:TopTopX \times -: Top \to Top preserves colimits (now forgetting the basepoint of XX). It is well-known that X×:TopTopX \times -: Top \to Top preserves colimits if XX is locally compact (the precise necessary and sufficient condition is that XX is core compact). Now Top *Top_\ast is topological over Set *Set_\ast. Since Set *Set_\ast is a total category (being for example monadic over SetSet), it would follow that Top *Top_\ast is as well. From that it would follow from that X:Top *Top *X \wedge -: Top_\ast \to Top_\ast, being cocontinuous, has a right adjoint GG. We can calculate GG is at the underlying set-level: if we put Y={0,1}Y = \{0, 1\} with basepoint 11, then

    Top *(X,Z)Top *(XY,Z)Top *(Y,GZ)|GZ|Top_{\ast}(X, Z) \cong Top_\ast(X \wedge Y, Z) \cong Top_\ast(Y, G Z) \cong {|G Z|}

    so that the points of GZG Z may be identified with basepoint-preserving maps XZX \to Z. The topology on GZG Z is of course uniquely determined from the natural isomorphism

    Top *(X,Z)Top *(,GZ)Top_\ast(X \wedge -, Z) \cong Top_\ast(-, G Z)

    Let us denote the pointed space GZG Z by Map *(X,Z)Map_\ast(X, Z). There is a question of whether we can lift the natural isomorphism of hom-sets

    Top *(XY,Z)Top *(Y,Map *(X,Z)Top_\ast(X \wedge Y, Z) \cong Top_\ast(Y, Map_\ast(X, Z)

    to the spatial level, where we have

    Map *(XY,Z)Map *(Y,Map *(X,Z))(*)Map_\ast(X \wedge Y, Z) \cong Map_\ast(Y, Map_\ast(X, Z)) \qquad (\ast)

    The answer would be ’yes’ if all three of X,Y,XYX, Y, X \wedge Y are locally compact – this would be a simple Yoneda argument, together with associativity of smash product in the presence of the local compactness assumptions. I don’t think the answer would necessarily be ’yes’ if only X,YX, Y are locally compact: the smash product XYX \wedge Y is likely only compactly generated. But if X,YX, Y are compact, it should be fine, since XYX \wedge Y will again be compact. I don’t believe Hausdorffness needs to enter the fray, although it’s true that the smash product of two compact Hausdorff spaces is again compact Hausdorff, because the equivalence relation on X×YX \times Y needed to form the quotient X×YXYX \times Y \to X \wedge Y is a closed equivalence relation.

    Of course, a lot of this discussion is nudging us in the direction of working with a convenient category of topological spaces in the first place, such as some variant of compactly generated spaces, where the topologies can be probed by maps from compact spaces. Over at smash product, some work of Elmendorf and Mandell is quoted which would assure the isomorphism (*)(\ast) in such a convenient setting.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeDec 23rd 2020

    All this being said, however, I think some more study is needed before making further edits to the page. In particular, I want to see how this material for the pointed space section jibes with the material of the previous section (which I’m a little rusty on myself).

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTime7 days ago

    added these pointers:

    Discussion of exponential objects in slice categories of compactly generated topological spaces (towards local cartesian closure):

    diff, v15, current

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTime6 days ago

    While I was at it, I have added missing data, links and formatting to the existing list of references, and organized by date of appearance.

    diff, v17, current

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)