Not signed in (Sign In)

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 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

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.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeFeb 22nd 2024

    Stub to collect references.

    v1, current

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorvarkor
    • CommentTimeFeb 23rd 2024

    It appears to me that the two definitions of discrete double fibration are equivalent: Lambert studies a notion of fibration equivalent to lax functors into the double category of sets and spans, whereas Fröhlich and Moser study a notion of fibration equivalent to normal lax functors into the double category of categories and distributors. However, it follows from Proposition 5.14 of CS10 that these are equivalent.

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeFeb 23rd 2024

    Yes, I think that’s right. But I thought the two definitions of non-discrete double fibration were not equivalent?

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorvarkor
    • CommentTimeFeb 23rd 2024

    Are there multiple definitions of non-discrete double fibrations? I thought the only place a definition was proposed was in Double Fibrations.

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeFeb 24th 2024

    Perhaps not. Maybe I misunderstood the comments in the Fröhlich-Moser paper about their approach being different.

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorvarkor
    • CommentTimeFeb 24th 2024

    My understanding of that remark is that the authors do believe their approach to be fundamentally different from that of Lambert (because their fibrations are valued in categories rather than sets) and of Cruttwell–Lambert–Pronk–Szyld (because they describe discrete fibrations rather than arbitrary fibrations). However, I think the universal property of Mod provides the connection they were missing to tie things together. (I sent Fröhlich and Moser an email to clarify, though have not yet received a response.)