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 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 elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration finite 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 homological homological-algebra homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory internal-categories k-theory lie lie-theory limit limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic manifolds mathematics measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology nforum 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).
    • CommentRowNumber1.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJul 9th 2010

    created 2-site with the material from Mike’s web (as he suggested). Added pointers to original articles by Ross Street.

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJul 9th 2010

    …and split it off into a separate 2-sheaf, similarly

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorzskoda
    • CommentTimeJul 9th 2010

    There were few errors in the original Street’s paper, there should be note on them. I do not remember where they were corrected exactly.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJul 9th 2010

    the above was triggered by me hyperlinking Igor’s upcoming talk.

    If anyone feels like expanding the 2-topos part of the nLab, this is now a good occasion…

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorzskoda
    • CommentTimeJul 9th 2010

    Of course, Igor knows about the error remarks, but I forgot what he told me.

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeJul 9th 2010

    The main error that I know about is remarked on after the proof of this theorem.

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeJul 9th 2010

    It would be awesome if we could use the nLab to merge the directions that all of the 2-topos people have been thinking. If Igor is interested in contributing that would great. Unfortunately my time is somewhat limited this summer, but I’ll do what I can.

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeJul 9th 2010

    Oh, and thanks for starting to move stuff from my web! A lot of what’s there, like regular 2-category (michaelshulman), could be on the main lab; I put it on my web when I was less sure of it, and less confident about putting newish stuff on the main nLab, than I am now. I’ll start doing some more, when I get a chance, but feel free to continue. I would ask that you not move any of the stuff about logic or fibration classifiers, I think – that’s in a much more fragmentary state at the moment. But all the stuff about regular/coherent 2-categories, factorization systems, and Grothendieck 2-topoi probably deserves to be on the main nLab.

    One thing that could use discussing is the terminology for the morphisms occurring. I had been using “ff” and “eso” since that’s what Street uses, but in discussion later with David Rydh I was convinced that it would be better to call these “1-monic” and “strong 1-epic” respectively, with “faithful” and “eso+full” becoming “2-monic” and “strong 2-epic.” I hope this is in line with our numbering schemes at subcategory and elsewhere. Thoughts?

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeJul 9th 2010
    • (edited Jul 9th 2010)

    Thoughts?

    Assuming that it is in line with the numbering schemes at subcategory (which is a technical question: is a 11-monic morphism in a 22-category that happens to be a 11-category precisely the same thing as a monic morhpism in a category?, etc), then I agree. The numbered terms are much more suggestive.

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJul 9th 2010

    Oh, and thanks for starting to move stuff from my web!

    The pleasure is all mine.

    feel free to continue.

    I would enjoy to, but I don’t see myself finding the time, soon. I am insanely busy with something else. Or should be. Every now and then I need a distraction of course. What I did here was to supply decent hyperlinking to our little workshop’s little website and it seemed inappropriate to point to a personal web for topics that are under general consideration, if you see what I mean.

    But Igor should really get involved here. Maybe I can arrange that he has to work off his travel refunds by nnLab labor ;-)

    • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeJul 9th 2010

    The numbering of these things is like whack-a-mole; it seems impossible to get everything to come out ideally. With the above proposal, a 1-monic morphism in a 2-category that happens to be a 1-category is the same as a monic morphism in a category, and a strong 1-epic morphism in such a 2-category is the same as a strong epic morphism in a category, but a strong 1-epic in C is not necessarily “1-epic” in the sense of being 1-monic in C opC^{op}; all you can say is that it’s 2-monic (a weaker notion) in C opC^{op}. David Rydh and I felt that it was more important for the numbers in “1-monic” and “strong 1-epic” to match up, since those are the two most important ones in 2-topos theory and form a factorization system, and similarly we also have a (2-monic, strong 2-epic) factorization system. Then you can make it true that “strong k-epics are k-epic” if you define a k-epic in an n-category as an (n-k)-monic in the opposite n-category, which I think isn’t so bad, except that it’s not stable under regarding n-categories as (n+1)-categories. However, we’re familiar with the idea that “plain epics” aren’t really well-behaved, and the good and more important notion of “strong k-epic” is stable under that operation.

    • CommentRowNumber12.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2010

    By the way, I should say that David Rydh and I have been sort of planning to write a “background info paper” on 2-exactness properties and 2-toposes, in particular fixing the error(s?) in and expanding on Street’s paper. Nothing has happened on it for a long time, for the usual reasons. But it seems like something of the sort is really needed, and having good nLab pages on this stuff would also go a long way.

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)