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 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 history homological homological-algebra homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory k-theory lie 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 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.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeOct 26th 2010
    • (edited Oct 26th 2010)

    I started at cohesive (infinity,1)-topos a section van Kampen theorem

    In the cohesive \infty-topos itself the theorem holds trivially. The interesting part is, I think, to which extent it restricts to the concrete cohesive objects under the embedding Conc(H)HConc(\mathbf{H}) \hookrightarrow \mathbf{H}.

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorDavidRoberts
    • CommentTimeOct 26th 2010

    The page cohesive infinity-topos doesn’t exist! But your other link works.

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeOct 26th 2010

    Thanks, fixed.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeOct 26th 2010

    I shouldn’t have gotten myself distracted by this, since I need to be doing something else, but nevertheless I did spend some time now on expanding and polishing my purported proof of the higher van Kampen theorem using cohesive \infty-topos technology here.

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeOct 26th 2010
    • (edited Oct 26th 2010)

    I worked a bit more to polish the argument that the pushout of topological spaces remains a homotopy pushout after the embedding of the spaces as 0-truncated topological \infty-groupoids.

    One can see this directly with a bit of effort, I think, but one can also fall back to the 1-categorical van Kampen theorem to see this, which is maybe noteworthy:


    U 1U 2 U 1 U 2 X \array{ U_1 \cap U_2 &\to& U_1 \\ \downarrow && \downarrow \\ U_2 &\to& X }

    a cover of the topological space XX by two open subsets, pick a good open cover of XX, call the Cech nerve QXQ X and write QU iQ U_i for the Cech nerves of the restriction to those open subsets that land in U iU_i. Then one can show that the ordinary pushout

    Q(U 1)Q(U 2) Q(U 1) Q(U 2) Q(U 1) Q(U 1)Q(U 2)Q(U 2) \array{ Q(U_1) \cap Q(U_2) &\to& Q(U_1) \\ \downarrow && \downarrow \\ Q(U_2) &\to& Q(U_1) \coprod_{Q(U_1) \cap Q(U_2)} Q(U_2) }

    of simplicial presheaves over open balls is a homotopy pushout. So the question is if this is again equivalent to XX.

    Since all objects are 0-truncated, it suffices to check that the 1-truncation of the pushout is XX. It is easy to see that π 0\pi_0 agrees. To see that π 1\pi_1 of the pushout vanishes (the categorical π 1\pi_1 not the geometric one!!) pass objectwise to the geometric realization and then use the ordinary 1-van Kampen theorem.

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeOct 26th 2010

    I made it overly complicated by working in the projective model structure. Using the injective structure the whole statement becomes trivial. We can prove higher van Kampen in a single line.

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)