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 internal-categories k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure 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 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).

nLab > Latest Changes: cogroup

Bottom of Page

1 to 14 of 14

  1.  
    • CommentRowNumber1.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009
    Our cogroup entry is described here as 'meager'. Can we expand it?
    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009
    Sure we can. We just copy the good parts of the MO replies over to it.

    That's the general idea: discuss stuff elsewhere and archive the stable and useful bits here.
    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009
    There is the issue of unattributed copying that Ben Webster brought up. Perhaps we could encourage MO to enforce a policy whereby unless otherwise stated any material is deemed open to copying into nLab - a little like the approach to organ donation which relies on opt out.
    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009
    • (edited Nov 3rd 2009)
    <blockquote>
    There is the issue of unattributed copying that Ben Webster brought up
    </blockquote>

    So: attribute it.

    Copy it here and in the references say: "this is taken in parts from the discussion at http://..etcpp".

    We do this elsewhere. For instance at multisymplectic geometry.
    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009
    I mean, I keep saying "copy and paste" in order to emphasize how little effort it is.

    But of course, please, there might still be the possibility that somebody reads the discussion there, understands it, and then reproduces his understanding in his own words here.
    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorAndrew Stacey
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009

    Given that I was one of the contributors to that discussion on MO, that there was nothing said there that I didn't already know, and that I didn't cut-and-paste anything at all, I don't particularly feel the need to attribute anything. I suppose it might be thought useful to have a link to that discussion, but only in a general sense of regarding n-lab and MO as symbiotic rather than competitive so wherever there is a topic in both it may be useful to cross-link - but then this should be done on a more systematic (and automatic) basis.

    Anyway, I've made a start and I've renamed it cogroup object. For the time being, co-H-object also redirects there.

    Obvious things to do: generalise to monoidal categories, add in links, think up more examples.

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009
    • (edited Nov 3rd 2009)
    Thanks Andrew!

    Now if only the MO link to cogroup would correctly redirect to your new cogroup object. Is that the redirect cache bug at work that Toby keeps mentioning?
    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorAndrew Stacey
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009

    Yup, that's the cache bug. At least, deleting the cache copy made it work. Now all I need to do is get enough rep on MO to edit that post and remove the word "meagre". I need another 650ish points for that so someone needs to get over there and start asking questions on Tall-Wraith monoids and Frolicher spaces!

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009
    lol

    But seriously, it's good that the "meager"-comment is there, except maybe one should have given a better reaction to it than I did. But it is important to make people understand that of course there are lots of things missing on the nab, but that this should make them want to put them in, not complain about it.
    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorAndrew Stacey
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009

    Yes, I guess the ideal result would have been for the querent to rewrite the n-lab entry based on the answers that they'd received.

    • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009
    Exactly. We should promise them "reputation points" if they do so.
    • CommentRowNumber12.
    • CommentAuthorEric
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009

    It would be funny if we could make contributions to the nLab eligible for "reputation points" (whatever those are!) over at MO.

    PS: I'm NOT suggesting "reputation points" for the nLab, but for those at MO who care about such things, it might make them more willing to contribute to the nLab.

    • CommentRowNumber13.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009
    I might just be an interesting psychological experiment to see what happens when we create a page reputation points here where we list names of MO contributors with a number behind them, which increases when they show up here.
    • CommentRowNumber14.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2009
    (Not being serious, hope that's clear.)

1 to 14 of 14

  1.