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).

nLab > Latest Changes: semisimplicial spectra

Bottom of Page

1 to 6 of 6

  1.  
    • CommentRowNumber1.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 2nd 2014
    • (edited Jun 2nd 2014)

    Somebody emailed me highlighting that the text green here, revision 69 of Dold-Kan correspondence does not quite parse.

    I didn’t write this,though. There is a definition meant to be equivalent to that at combinatorial spectrum, but at least some indices need renamining, and it seems maybe more needs to be fixed or at least added. Not sure. Also I absolutely don’t have the leisure to look into this right now. I hope somebody finds the energy to look into it.

  2. I emailed. The wrong indices Urs refers to are several instances of k in the definition of the category of stable simplices. Perhaps the definition should be: “The category of stable simplices has integer numbers as objects. Given two objects k and l, the set of morphisms from k to l is the set of order-preserving maps h from the set of natural numbers to itself such that h(n+1) = h(n)+1 for all but a finite number of n. […]”

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 2nd 2014

    I suppose that must have been meant, but then there still seems to be something missing.

    BTW, at stable Dold-Kan correspondence (where I had blindly copied that paragraph to from Dold-Kan correspondence in an attempt to have a better entry layout) I have removed that definition entirely and replaced it by just a pointer to combinatorial spectrum. The definition given there is actually the one that Kan refers to in the article that is cited in the bit in question.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 4th 2014
    • (edited Jun 5th 2014)

    CommunicativeAlgebra,

    since nothing seems to have happened since, would you have a second to contact Dmitri to ask him to either sort this out the way he envisioned it to be or else, if he has no time or interest, let one of us revise it? Thanks.

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorDmitri Pavlov
    • CommentTimeJun 5th 2014

    I corrected the formula, the previous variant was complete nonsense. Sorry about the confusion.

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 5th 2014

    Thanks!!

1 to 6 of 6

  1.