Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below
Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
started Weinstein symplectic category
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.
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.
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?
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! :)
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.
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?)
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.
I have added to Weinstein symplectic category a brief a remark on refinement to prequantum correspondences.
added a bunch of historical References, taken from the introduction of Alan Weinstein’s lecture notes
1 to 11 of 11