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-categories 2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry bundles calculus categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-theory cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science connection constructive constructive-mathematics cosmology definitions deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry differential-topology digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration finite foundations functional-analysis functor galois-theory gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry goodwillie-calculus graph graphs gravity grothendieck 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 internal-categories k-theory lie-theory limit limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal-logic model model-category-theory monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology multicategories noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory 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-theory superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topological 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 16th 2012

    created internal sheaf

    Mainly it was bugging me that I didn’t find a piece of literature that said it quite explicitly the way I do there, so I wanted to have that written down. To be expanded, eventually.

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeMar 16th 2012
    • (edited Mar 16th 2012)

    I have further expanded it (added two basic Propositions, more details in the definitions) and tried to prettify a bit more.

  1. I added the pedestrian definitions of presheaf and sheaf (as internal diagrams).

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeAug 29th 2012
    • (edited Aug 29th 2012)


    I moved your new paragraph to become a subsection of the Definition-section, made my previous material there also a subsection, and added at the beginning of the Definition-section a little lead-in on how we will present two versions of the definition, one abstract, one more explicit.

    Of course much of the explicitness of the second definition (the one you added) is out-sourced to the entry internal diagram- But I guess that’s okay.

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeAug 30th 2012

    In this spirit I have also edited the very very last sentence of the entry (at then end of the References) making it now point to the two Definition-sections where previously it just vaguely referred to the explicit defintition. Good.

  2. Thanks, much better! I agree it’s not a problem that the actual explicitness is one further click away.

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorzskoda
    • CommentTimeSep 7th 2012

    Do you see a direct way to expand the concept to an internal generalization of non-set valued sheaves ? In my understanding this entry generalizes the set-valued sheaves only.

  3. You can certainly have presheaves valued in locally internal categories over the base topos, see the last section of internal diagram (where this is detailed in the language of indexed categories). Using the internal language, these look exactly like ordinary non-Set-valued presheaves; so I’d guess that to obtain a sensible notion of a sheaf, one could simply formulate the usual sheaf condition in the internal language.

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeSep 8th 2012

    The formulation In terms of external 2-sheaves works by passing to the 2-category of internal categories. In there you can do all of category theory and topos theory as you did externally.

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)