Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below
Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
created microlinear space
One thing I might be mixed up above:
in the literature I have seen it seems to say that
$ X^D x_X X^D \simeq X^{D(2)}$
with
$ D(2) = { (x_1,x_2) \in R \times R | x_i x_j = 0} $.
But shouldn't it be
$ D(2)' = { (x_1,x_2) \in R \times R | x_i^2 = 0} $.
?
oops. I forget how math works here...
Use double dollar signs, or <latex>
and </latex>
if you want to see a preview. Also check the Instructions when you forget.
I strenghened the proposition about microlinear loci, claiming that also in the two sheaf toposes
and
all representables are microlinear. Either I am mixed up or this is essentially obvious. But maybe somebody feelss like checking.
darn
I don't get the dollar signs to work.
That is just weird. A little experimenting shows that there seems to be a maximum length for subscripts. x_{finite ope}
works but x_{finite open}
doesn't: and .
Unfortunately, as we currently ship LaTeX processing off somewhere else, there's not a lot I can about that!
okay, thanks Andrew, at least that tells me what's going on.
Was a bad idea to put that novel-like text in a subscript anyway! :-)
So here what I wanted to typeset:
for
the category of smooth loci, consider the Grothendieck topology given by
a) covers are finite open covers
b) covers are finite open covers and projections.
Then sheaves wrt the first yield the smooth topos , sheaves with respect to the second the smooth topos , with notation as in Models for Smooth Infinitesimal Analyis (see list in appendix 2).
I tried to add to microlinear space a (the supposedly obvious) proof that all representable objects in these toposes are microlinear.
hmph
Just write it out without dollar signs. We can read TeX.
1 to 10 of 10