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).
    • CommentRowNumber1.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeDec 23rd 2013

    Hopkins and Lurie’s Ambidexterity in K(n)-Local Stable Homotopy Theory contains things of current interest here. Have we seen that norm map before, relating homotopy coinvariants to invariants in a localised setting?

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeDec 23rd 2013

    Thanks for the alert!

    I used to point to the lectures that Jacob Lurie had given about this in Notre Dame and elsewhere, now I have updated these citations with the link to the pdf (in the list of references at motivic quantization and at motives in physics).

    I have given this as category:reference-page Ambidexterity in K(n)-Local Stable Homotopy Theory.

    Notice that in terms of what we have been discussing here recently the article is about un-twisted Wirthmüller isomorphisms in the interpretation of dependent linear type theory in (infinity,1)-module bundles over homotopy types. The un-twisted Wirthmüller morphism is the map “μ\mu” for instance in Construction 4.0.7.

    In particular the integration map of Construction 4.0.7 is a special case of the integration map in Type-semantics for quantization (schreiber).

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeDec 23rd 2013
    • (edited Dec 23rd 2013)

    Ah, and to answer explicitly to your question:

    Have we seen that norm map before,

    yes, that norm map is an untwisted Wirthmüller isomorphism. To see this compare remark 4.1.12 in Hopkins-Lurie with (4.7) and the line below (4.8) in May 05.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeDec 23rd 2013

    I thought it felt rather familiar.

    Also looking at Celiott’s notes on Lurie’s lectures, I see on p. 19 an analogy between K(n)K(n) and primes. Was this what you were thinking of here, though you said E-theory?

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeDec 23rd 2013
    • (edited Dec 23rd 2013)

    Ah, yes. I should have said Morava K, not Morava E.