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 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 sheaves 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).
    • CommentRowNumber1.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeAug 15th 2012
    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthoradeelkh
    • CommentTimeApr 17th 2013
    • (edited Apr 17th 2013)

    Added a very brief description of Kitchloo's symplectic category, and a link to a reference

    discussing relations between Kitchloo's category and the Grothendieck-Teichmuller group.

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorTim_Porter
    • CommentTimeApr 17th 2013

    Whilst following up those links I created a page for Paul Seidel and another one for Denis Auroux. There was also a set of notes that Auroux wrote as a Beginners Guide to Fukaya categories which on the Arxiv. Auroux has several useful looking sets of course notes on his webpages.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeApr 17th 2013

    So you too were at the Clay workshop, Adeel?

    Regarding the drive towards higher geometric quantization, does one confront a similar problem where there’s a natural choice of something which wants to be a (higher)-category, but which needs to be stabilized first?

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthoradeelkh
    • CommentTimeApr 17th 2013

    So you too were at the Clay workshop, Adeel?

    I was indeed. There weren't as many higher structures as I expected, but I did get to meet Ronnie Brown! :)

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeApr 17th 2013

    Shame we didn’t meet up.

    There weren’t as many higher structures as I expected…

    Yes, I think we could invoke the Trade Descriptions Act.

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeApr 17th 2013

    does one confront a similar problem where there’s a natural choice of something which wants to be a (higher)-category, but which needs to be stabilized first?

    I think the idea is that things don’t have to be “stabilized” in this case if one formulates them in derived geometry from the beginning, which is a way of making the formalism automatically correct non-transverse intersections.

    (Or maybe I am misunderstanding what you have in mind?)

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeApr 17th 2013

    No, I think you are understanding me to the extent I’ve understood anything myself.

    Is it ever possible that the process of going from the non-derived setting to the derived setting is worth working out since you might pick something up you wouldn’t otherwise see? I mean, is it possible, say, that you wouldn’t notice the Grothendieck-Teichmüller group being around if you’d just started in the derived setting? Otherwise, don’t you just think to yourself reading such a paper, why didn’t they just start derived?

    By the way, Adeel @#2 has caused Grothendieck-Teichmuller group to be created, but there’s a page Grothendieck-Teichmüller tower with redirect for ’Grothendieck-Teichmüller group’ (with umlaut). Is it better to split tower and group as two pages? I guess redirects for non-umlaut versions might help too.

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 6th 2013
    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 12th 2013

    added a bunch of historical References, taken from the introduction of Alan Weinstein’s lecture notes

    • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthorzskoda
    • CommentTimeSep 20th 2022
    • W.M.Tulczyjew, S.Zakrzewski, The category of Fresnel kernels, J. Geom. Phys. 1:3, 1984, 79–120 doi

    diff, v18, current

    • CommentRowNumber12.
    • CommentAuthorperezl.alonso
    • CommentTimeMar 21st 2024

    added a couple of lines about how the usual notion of symplectomorphism is restrictive

    diff, v23, current