Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

• Username
• Password
• Remember me

• Sign in using OpenID
• Remember me

• Forgot your password?
• Apply for membership

2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry book 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 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 internal-categories k-theory 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 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 tqft type type-theory universal variational-calculus

1. • CommentRowNumber1.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeJun 27th 2021
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexto go alongside *[[cyclic loop space]]* and *[[free loop stack]]*. Not quite done yet, but need to save <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/cyclic+loop+stack/1">v1</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/cyclic+loop+stack">current</a>

   to go alongside cyclic loop space and free loop stack. Not quite done yet, but need to save

   v1, current

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
   • CommentTimeJul 1st 2021
   • PermaLink
   Author: David_Corfield
   Format: MarkdownItexCarrying on the conversation from [here](https://nforum.ncatlab.org/discussion/7938/mysterious-duality/?Focus=93475#Comment_93475), 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 $\ast \to \mathbf{B} S^1 \to \mathbf{B} (S^1 \times S^1) \to \mathbf{B} S^1 \to \ast$. But this isn't comparable to right-left base change twice along $\ast \to \mathbf{B} S^1 \to \ast \to \mathbf{B} S^1 \to \ast$.

   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 $\ast \to \mathbf{B} S^1 \to \mathbf{B} (S^1 \times S^1) \to \mathbf{B} S^1 \to \ast$. But this isn’t comparable to right-left base change twice along $\ast \to \mathbf{B} S^1 \to \ast \to \mathbf{B} S^1 \to \ast$.

3. • CommentRowNumber3.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeJul 1st 2021
   • (edited Jul 1st 2021)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexYes. This is related to the fact that the Extension$\dashv$Cyclification-adjunction keeps the cyclification in the slice. Iterating it looks as $$ \array{ \mathbf{H} & \underoverset {\underset{Cyc_{\mathcal{S}_2}}{\longrightarrow}} {\overset{Ext_{\mathcal{S}_2}}{\longleftarrow}} {\phantom{AAA}\bot\phantom{AAA}} & \mathbf{H}_{/\mathbf{B}\mathcal{S}_2} & \underoverset {\underset{Cyc_{\mathcal{S}_1}}{\longrightarrow}} {\overset{Ext_{\mathcal{S}_1}}{\longleftarrow}} {\phantom{AAA}\bot\phantom{AAA}} & \mathbf{H}_{/\mathbf{B}(\mathcal{S}_1 \times \mathcal{S}_2)} \\ \ast &\xrightarrow{\phantom{AAAAAA}}& \mathbf{B}\mathcal{S}_2 &\xrightarrow{\phantom{AAAAAA}}& \mathbf{B}\mathcal{S}_1\times \mathbf{B}\mathcal{S}_2 } $$ This is maybe most transparent for the left adjoint: $Ext_{\mathcal{S}_1}$ reads in a spacetime that is a KK-compactification on a fiber $\mathcal{S}_1 \times \mathcal{S}_2$ and it first "de-compactifies" the $\mathcal{S}_1$-factor. Then $Ext_{\mathcal{S}_2}$ de-compactifies the remaining $\mathcal{S}_2$-factor.

   Yes. This is related to the fact that the Extension$\dashv$Cyclification-adjunction keeps the cyclification in the slice. Iterating it looks as

   $$\array{ \mathbf{H} & \underoverset {\underset{Cyc_{\mathcal{S}_2}}{\longrightarrow}} {\overset{Ext_{\mathcal{S}_2}}{\longleftarrow}} {\phantom{AAA}\bot\phantom{AAA}} & \mathbf{H}_{/\mathbf{B}\mathcal{S}_2} & \underoverset {\underset{Cyc_{\mathcal{S}_1}}{\longrightarrow}} {\overset{Ext_{\mathcal{S}_1}}{\longleftarrow}} {\phantom{AAA}\bot\phantom{AAA}} & \mathbf{H}_{/\mathbf{B}(\mathcal{S}_1 \times \mathcal{S}_2)} \\ \ast &\xrightarrow{\phantom{AAAAAA}}& \mathbf{B}\mathcal{S}_2 &\xrightarrow{\phantom{AAAAAA}}& \mathbf{B}\mathcal{S}_1\times \mathbf{B}\mathcal{S}_2 }$$

   This is maybe most transparent for the left adjoint: $Ext_{\mathcal{S}_1}$ reads in a spacetime that is a KK-compactification on a fiber $\mathcal{S}_1 \times \mathcal{S}_2$ and it first “de-compactifies” the $\mathcal{S}_1$-factor. Then $Ext_{\mathcal{S}_2}$ de-compactifies the remaining $\mathcal{S}_2$-factor.

4. • CommentRowNumber4.
   • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
   • CommentTimeJul 1st 2021
   • (edited Jul 1st 2021)
   • PermaLink
   Author: David_Corfield
   Format: MarkdownItexBut then if toroidal cyclification (your diagram in #3 + left base change for the homotopy fibre) is not double $S^1$-cyclification, why is Voronov looking at iterated $S^1$-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?

   But then if toroidal cyclification (your diagram in #3 + left base change for the homotopy fibre) is not double $S^1$-cyclification, why is Voronov looking at iterated $S^1$-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?

5. • CommentRowNumber5.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeJul 1st 2021
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexTrue, if Sasha really means what he writes there, then it's different.

   True, if Sasha really means what he writes there, then it’s different.