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 definitions 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 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.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeDec 16th 2010
   • (edited Dec 16th 2010)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexstarted stub on [[Tannaka duality for geometric stacks]], but need to interrupt now. The theorem there can be read as justifying the point of view of [[derived noncommutative geometry]] to regard the 2-algebra $QC(X)$ as a valid replacement for the 1-algebra $\mathcal{O}(X)$.

   started stub on Tannaka duality for geometric stacks, but need to interrupt now.

   The theorem there can be read as justifying the point of view of derived noncommutative geometry to regard the 2-algebra $QC(X)$ as a valid replacement for the 1-algebra $\mathcal{O}(X)$.

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthorDavidRoberts
   • CommentTimeDec 16th 2010
   • (edited Dec 16th 2010)
   • PermaLink
   Author: DavidRoberts
   Format: MarkdownItexI don't think this line is right: >More generally, for $(S, \mathcal{O}_S)$ a [[ringed topos]], we have $$ Hom(S,X) \simeq Hom_\otimes(QC(X); A Mod) \,. $$ Surely that should be $Hom_\otimes(QC(X); \mathcal{O}_S Mod)$?

   I don’t think this line is right:

   More generally, for $(S, \mathcal{O}_S)$ a ringed topos, we have

   $$Hom(S,X) \simeq Hom_\otimes(QC(X); A Mod) \,.$$

   Surely that should be $Hom_\otimes(QC(X); \mathcal{O}_S Mod)$?

3. • CommentRowNumber3.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeDec 17th 2010
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexclear case of copy-and-paste error. But check out the latest version, with lots more details.

   clear case of copy-and-paste error. But check out the latest version, with lots more details.

4. • CommentRowNumber4.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeDec 17th 2010
   • (edited Dec 17th 2010)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexI added the details on étale-locally ringed toposes that makes the statement of the main theorem the way I did it correct. Have to quit now. Maybe more tomorrow.

   I added the details on étale-locally ringed toposes that makes the statement of the main theorem the way I did it correct.

   Have to quit now. Maybe more tomorrow.

5. • CommentRowNumber5.
   • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
   • CommentTimeAug 3rd 2014
   • PermaLink
   Author: David_Corfield
   Format: MarkdownItexWhy is this result 'Tannakian'? Can it be seen as some way of reconstructing something from its actions?

   Why is this result ’Tannakian’? Can it be seen as some way of reconstructing something from its actions?

6. • CommentRowNumber6.
   • CommentAuthorDavidRoberts
   • CommentTimeAug 3rd 2014
   • PermaLink
   Author: DavidRoberts
   Format: MarkdownItexDaniel Schäppi has Tannakian style results where essentially on is reconstructing a Hopf algebroid, ie a groupoid in affine schemes (ie2 a geometric stack) from its category of coherent sheaves. The original case reconstructing a group is the one-object version, BG, where coherent sheaves are more or less representations.

   Daniel Schäppi has Tannakian style results where essentially on is reconstructing a Hopf algebroid, ie a groupoid in affine schemes (ie2 a geometric stack) from its category of coherent sheaves. The original case reconstructing a group is the one-object version, BG, where coherent sheaves are more or less representations.

7. • CommentRowNumber7.
   • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
   • CommentTimeAug 4th 2014
   • PermaLink
   Author: David_Corfield
   Format: MarkdownItexOK, so here the idea is that from $QC(X)$ (representation-like) and hom spaces to $QC(Spec A)$ one can reconstruct $X$, whereas classical Tannaka results reconstruct something from its category of representations and single underlying functor (maybe thought of as to the representations of the trivial object).

   OK, so here the idea is that from $QC(X)$ (representation-like) and hom spaces to $QC(Spec A)$ one can reconstruct $X$, whereas classical Tannaka results reconstruct something from its category of representations and single underlying functor (maybe thought of as to the representations of the trivial object).