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 bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-theory cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive constructive-mathematics cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration foundation foundations functional-analysis functor galois-theory gauge-theory gebra geometric 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 string string-theory superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory 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 21st 2009

    I started a section

    dependence on the underlying site at model structure on simplicial presheaves.

    So far this quotes a result from Jardine's lectures and then looks a bit at an example.

    At that example I would really like to conclude that the Quillen adjunction discussed there is actually a Quillen equivalence. But I have to interrupt now to make a telephone call... :-)

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeOct 22nd 2009

    a supposed proof that indeed we have a Quillen equivalence

     SPSh(Diff)_{inj}^{loc} \stackrel{\leftarrow}{\to} SPsh(CartSp)_{inj}^{loc}

    is now

    here in that entry

    of course Diff and CartSp is just one specific example. In as far as the proof is correct, it will work for all such pairs, for instance Schemes vs AffineSchemes .

    But check if it is indeed correct.

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeOct 22nd 2009

    now also added a section good covers with a definition that I think is good and with a proposition that I think is true and useful.

    However, it seems at this point of the night I seem to be unable to write down precisely what in my head seems to be the obvious proof. I wrote down something there, but need to get back to it. Maybe I am wrong, but I am not convinced of that as yet ;-)

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeOct 22nd 2009

    I think I got it right now.

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeOct 22nd 2009

    Danny Stevenson kindly wrote in to say that the fact in question

    (that every simplicial presheaf that is degreewise a coproduct of representables is cofibrant in alll these model structures)

    should be true and should be stated somewhere in Dan Dugger's work.

    He indicates a proof which sounds very much along the lines of the proof that I did give.

    So I regard this as settled for the time being, removed the green query boxes and just left in an indented remark that for the time being the proof is one I dreamed up which still deserves checking.

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeOct 22nd 2009

    renamed the section in question fibrant and cofibrant objects and expanded further.

    meanwhile Danny Stevenson writes in and points out various even stroger statements from the literature. Will try to include them after lunch...

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)