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.
to go alongside cyclic loop space and free loop stack. Not quite done yet, but need to save
Carrying on the conversation from here, I guess with cyclification here as a right adjoint followed by a left adjoint, there’s no structure around to help with iteration. Double cyclical iteration isn’t cyclification by the torus, etc.
Presumably one could factor toroidal cyclification as two right base changes and two left base changes along *→BS1→B(S1×S1)→BS1→*. But this isn’t comparable to right-left base change twice along *→BS1→*→BS1→*.
Yes. This is related to the fact that the Extension⊣Cyclification-adjunction keeps the cyclification in the slice. Iterating it looks as
HExt𝒮2⟵AAA⊥AAA⟶Cyc𝒮2H/B𝒮2Ext𝒮1⟵AAA⊥AAA⟶Cyc𝒮1H/B(𝒮1×𝒮2)*AAAAAA→B𝒮2AAAAAA→B𝒮1×B𝒮2This is maybe most transparent for the left adjoint: Ext𝒮1 reads in a spacetime that is a KK-compactification on a fiber 𝒮1×𝒮2 and it first “de-compactifies” the 𝒮1-factor. Then Ext𝒮2 de-compactifies the remaining 𝒮2-factor.
But then if toroidal cyclification (your diagram in #3 + left base change for the homotopy fibre) is not double S1-cyclification, why is Voronov looking at iterated S1-cyclication (slide 9) with a view to its relevance for toroidal-compactification (slide 5)? Isn’t that to connect the two processes mentioned at the end of #2?
True, if Sasha really means what he writes there, then it’s different.
1 to 5 of 5