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-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics 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 finite foundations functional-analysis functor galois-theory 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 lie-theory limit limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic manifolds mathematics measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology nforum nlab noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number 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
    • CommentTimeMar 14th 2012

    I thought we needed an entry enriched (infinity,1)-category, so I created one. Added an Idea-section that mentions the evident general abstract definition (which hasn’t been worked out) and mentions the evident model (which has).

    I have used links to this now at table - models for (infinity,1)-operads in an attempt to clarify the “general pattern” of the table (now the first part of the table itself).

    I notice/rememberd that we have two equally orphaned and equally stubby entries, titled weak enrichment and titled homotopical enrichment. Something should be done about that unfortunate state of affairs, but for the moment I just added more links between these.

    There was also this ancient discussion, which we don’t need to keep there:

    [begin old forwarded discussion]

    Urs: can anyone point me to – or write an entry containing – a discussion of systematical “homotopical enrichment” where we enrich over a homotopical category systematically weakening everything up to coherent homotopy. If/when we have this we should also link it to (infinity,n)-category, as that is built by iteratively doing homotopical enrichement starting with Top.

    Mike: If anyone ever does anything like that, I would love to see it. As far as I know there is no general theory. You can define Segal categories in any homotopical category with finite products. You can define complete Segal spaces in any model category, at least, and less may suffice. And you can define A A_\infty-categories in any monoidal homotopical category. But the problem is finding some way to get a handle on them, like lifting a model structure to them. Of course, people have iterated the existing definitions to get notions of nn-category and of (,n)(\infty,n)-category (Simpson-Tamsamani, Trimble, Barwick, Lurie, etc), but I’ve never seen a general theory. Peter May and I have been planning for a while to think about iterating enriched A A_\infty-categories.

    [end old forwarded discussion]

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 12th 2021

    added pointer to:

    • John D. Berman, Enriched infinity categories I: enriched presheaves (arXiv:2008.11323)

    diff, v11, current

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)