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 k-theory lie-theory limit 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 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 subobject 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.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeOct 6th 2010

    started an entry associated infinity-bundle

    in order to summarize the thesis by Matthias Wendt on associated \infty-bundles in arbitrary (,1)(\infty,1)-toposes, generalizing the classical old results by Stasheff and May from Grpd\infty Grpd.

    Also added some remarks on the relation to the discussion at principal infinity-bundle. Hopefully to be continued tomorrow.

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorzskoda
    • CommentTimeOct 27th 2011

    I have added a literature section to fiber bundle (not infinity version, sorry).

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorjim_stasheff
    • CommentTimeOct 28th 2011
    In re: principal infinity-bundle
    is there somewhere buried in there a comparison with actions up to strong homtopy?
    of course, the notions are equivalent
    but is it for the reader to translate?

    cf. also representations up to homotopy
    do we have an entry for that?
    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorjim_stasheff
    • CommentTimeOct 28th 2011
    pasting of pullbacks is misleading
    how about composition of pullbacks?
    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeOct 28th 2011

    Hi Jim!

    cf. also representations up to homotopy do we have an entry for that?

    Yes, a discussion is at infinity-representation .

    is there somewhere buried in there a comparison with actions up to strong homtopy?

    Yes, see at higher parallel transport the sections whose title begins with “Flat \infty-parallel transport…”.

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 22nd 2012
    • (edited Jun 22nd 2012)

    Mike, here a message to you (or, of course, anyone else who has looked into these questions):

    I am writing up a purely \infty-topos theoretic proof (meaning: no presentations, essentially a pseudo-formal HoTT proof except that it invokes groupoid objects and their realization) of the following (non-surprising) fact:

    Fact In an \infty-topos H\mathbf{H}, for VV any object, VV-fiber \infty-bundles over some XX are classified by H 1(X,Aut(V))=π 0H(X,BAut(V))H^1(X, \mathbf{Aut}(V)) = \pi_0 \mathbf{H}(X, \mathbf{B}\mathbf{Aut}(V)), this being induced by the map that sends an Aut(V)\mathbf{Aut}(V)-principal \infty-bundle to its canonically associated VV-bundle.

    Non-surprising as this may be, it directly implies the results referenced in the References at associated infinity-bundle as a special case (the 1-localic case) while itself using only a few lines of abstract nonsense. And the existence of object classifiers / univalence, of course.

    While these kinds of general statements are not widely known, I can imagine that they are very clear to a handful of experts. Such as you. On the other hand, I am not aware that these kinds of statements are in the literature.

    Or are they? Since we see here a vast overlap of bundle theory that was traditionally rooted in topology and differential geometry with structures now considered in type theory, it may be that in slight disguise this appears elsewhere.

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeJun 22nd 2012

    Well, the consideration of these things in general (,1)(\infty,1)-toposes is not really traditional. (-: As you probably know, in the case H=Gpd\mathbf{H}=\infty Gpd, this is essentially the central theorem of “Classifying Spaces and Fibrations”. I believe the only other (,1)(\infty,1)-toposes that belong to “classical algebraic topology” are slices of Gpd\infty Gpd (parametrized homotopy theory) and diagrams on orbit categories (equivariant homotopy theory). People have certainly studied bundles and classifying spaces in those contexts, but I don’t know whether theorems of this generality are classical in those cases.

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 22nd 2012

    Thanks, Mike, for the reaction.

    Yes, I am well aware that these considerations are not traditional. I just thought I’d check to which degree you, for instance, might find these kinds of statements by now to be an “obvious” consequence of \infty-topos axioms, or whether you have seen such statements claimed publically.

    As you probably know, in the case H=∞Gpd, this is essentially the central theorem of “Classifying Spaces and Fibrations”.

    Yes. And as I said: in fact all the References that are cited in the entry are direct special cases of this general statement, including the one in the article by Wendt, on simplicial presheaves over a 1-site.

    and diagrams on orbit categories (equivariant homotopy theory).

    Ah, that’s a good point. I haven’t looked into these for a while. I should check the literature again to compare. Can you point me somewhere specifically for these kinds of classifying statements (don’t worry if not, I can dig it out myself, but if you know it off the top of your head, you could safe me some searching).

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeJun 22nd 2012

    I don’t know where to look off the top of my head. I’m certainly not surprised that this is true in an (,1)(\infty,1)-topos, and I can guess how to go about proving it using quotients of groupoid objects; it seems like it ought to be fairly straightforward. I don’t think I’ve heard it stated explicitly anywhere, but I’m not an expert on the (,1)(\infty,1)-topos literature.

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 29th 2012
    • (edited Jun 29th 2012)

    I have expanded the References at associated infinity-bundle a bit further, prompted by seeing the new article On the classification of fibrations.

    Since this caused in me the feeling that possibly some groups working on this are not aware of what happens in other corners, I added to the References-section also

    • a pointer to the References at univalence

    • a pointer to the subsection at object classifier which discusses how the classical result follows from the existence of the object classifie in Grpd\infty Grpd.

    Finally I have allowed myself to also mention our writeup.

    I will now carry part of this discussion about references to a reply to Jim Stasheff over on the nnCafé here.