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 k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology nforum 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 sheaves 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.
   • CommentAuthorperezl.alonso
   • CommentTimeApr 30th 2024
   • PermaLink
   Author: perezl.alonso
   Format: MarkdownItexreferences on bornological vector spaces * Christian Houzel. *Espaces analytiques relatifs et throrrme de finitude*. Math. Ann. v.205 (1973), p.13-54. * Ralf Meyer. *Analytic cyclic cohomology* (1999). ([arXiv:math/9906205](https://arxiv.org/abs/math/9906205)). * Ralf Meyer. *Embeddings of derived categories of bornological modules* (2004). ([arXiv:math/0410596](https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0410596)). <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/Vect/21">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/Vect/21">v21</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Vect">current</a>

   references on bornological vector spaces

   • Christian Houzel. Espaces analytiques relatifs et throrrme de finitude. Math. Ann. v.205 (1973), p.13-54.

   • Ralf Meyer. Analytic cyclic cohomology (1999). (arXiv:math/9906205).

   • Ralf Meyer. Embeddings of derived categories of bornological modules (2004). (arXiv:math/0410596).

   diff, v21, current

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthorJ-B Vienney
   • CommentTimeMay 1st 2024
   • PermaLink
   Author: J-B Vienney
   Format: MarkdownItexMentioned that $Vect$ is closed monoidal. Corrected typo about bornological spaces: "cocomplete and cocomplete" -> "complete and cocomplete". <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/Vect/22">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/Vect/22">v22</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Vect">current</a>

   Mentioned that $Vect$ is closed monoidal. Corrected typo about bornological spaces: “cocomplete and cocomplete” -> “complete and cocomplete”.

   diff, v22, current

3. • CommentRowNumber3.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeMay 1st 2024
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexmoving the references on bornological vector spaces to the entry *[[bornological topological vector space]]* <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/Vect/23">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/Vect/23">v23</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Vect">current</a>

   moving the references on bornological vector spaces to the entry bornological topological vector space

   diff, v23, current

4. • CommentRowNumber4.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeMay 1st 2024
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexRemoved the remark saying that bornological vector spaces have "better categorical properties", but then stating just properties already enjoyed by plain $Vect$. What was the intention here? <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/Vect/23">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/Vect/23">v23</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Vect">current</a>

   Removed the remark saying that bornological vector spaces have “better categorical properties”, but then stating just properties already enjoyed by plain $Vect$.

   What was the intention here?

   diff, v23, current

5. • CommentRowNumber5.
   • CommentAuthorJ-B Vienney
   • CommentTimeMay 1st 2024
   • (edited May 1st 2024)
   • PermaLink
   Author: J-B Vienney
   Format: MarkdownItexThis is probably a bit off-topic but the only sensible thing I can say is from the point of view of differential categories: From the paper [A convenient differential category](https://arxiv.org/pdf/1006.3140), the category of "Mackey-complete, separated, topological convex bornological vector spaces and bornological linear maps is a differential category". They also say that this category is symmetric monoidal closed, complete and cocomplete. I believe (this is not something which is published, and I have not yet worked carefully on this. It is not the same that the better known fact that $Vect^{op}$ is a differential category.) that $Vect$ is also a differential category but with a map $!A \rightarrow B$ being something called a "polynomial law". $Vect$ is also a symmetric monoidal closed, complete and cocomplete category. So as far as being a differential category, monoidal closed, complete and cocomplete are concerned, this category of bornological spaces have the same categorical properties than $Vect$ but it allows to treat more differentiable functions.

   This is probably a bit off-topic but the only sensible thing I can say is from the point of view of differential categories: From the paper A convenient differential category, the category of “Mackey-complete, separated, topological convex bornological vector spaces and bornological linear maps is a differential category”. They also say that this category is symmetric monoidal closed, complete and cocomplete. I believe (this is not something which is published, and I have not yet worked carefully on this. It is not the same that the better known fact that $Vect^{op}$ is a differential category.) that $Vect$ is also a differential category but with a map $!A \rightarrow B$ being something called a “polynomial law”. $Vect$ is also a symmetric monoidal closed, complete and cocomplete category. So as far as being a differential category, monoidal closed, complete and cocomplete are concerned, this category of bornological spaces have the same categorical properties than $Vect$ but it allows to treat more differentiable functions.

6. • CommentRowNumber6.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeMay 1st 2024
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexThis may be worthwhile recording at *[[bornological vector space]]*! I think that generically any category of structured vector spaces will tend to have less good categorical properties than plain $Vect$. The fact worth recording is if such categories are about as well behaved as plain $Vect$, not the other way around.

   This may be worthwhile recording at bornological vector space!

   I think that generically any category of structured vector spaces will tend to have less good categorical properties than plain $Vect$. The fact worth recording is if such categories are about as well behaved as plain $Vect$, not the other way around.

7. • CommentRowNumber7.
   • CommentAuthorperezl.alonso
   • CommentTimeMay 1st 2024
   • PermaLink
   Author: perezl.alonso
   Format: MarkdownItexDid not realize we already had an entry for this. I recorded this references because of their use in and Prop 3.6 in * Jonathan Block, Calder Daenzer. *Mukai duality for gerbes with connection* (2008). ([arXiv:0803.1529](https://arxiv.org/abs/0803.1529)).

   Did not realize we already had an entry for this. I recorded this references because of their use in and Prop 3.6 in

   • Jonathan Block, Calder Daenzer. Mukai duality for gerbes with connection (2008). (arXiv:0803.1529).
8. • CommentRowNumber8.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeMay 1st 2024
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexYes, these kinds of propositions are noteworthy not because $Vect$ would not have these properties, but because it is non-trivial for topological vector spaces to still have such properties. (In this vein, currently the whole field of "condensed mathematics" is being developed to make algebra with topological structure retain the good category-theoretic properties of plain algebra.)

   Yes, these kinds of propositions are noteworthy not because $Vect$ would not have these properties, but because it is non-trivial for topological vector spaces to still have such properties.

   (In this vein, currently the whole field of “condensed mathematics” is being developed to make algebra with topological structure retain the good category-theoretic properties of plain algebra.)