Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

• Username
• Password
• Remember me

• Sign in using OpenID
• Remember me

• Forgot your password?
• Apply for membership

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

1. • CommentRowNumber1.
   • CommentAuthorThomas Holder
   • CommentTimeAug 5th 2014
   • PermaLink
   Author: Thomas Holder
   Format: MarkdownItexUnfortunately, I am lacking chocolat medals (as well as the authority to award them), but thanks to the author (presumably Todd) who graced [[Karoubi envelope]] with the proof that smooth manifolds result from open sets by idempotent splitting. I have added a reference to Lawvere's Perugia notes where this appeared as an exercise. Entre parenthèses: it appears to me that it'd be better to have the proof at the page for smooth manifolds and to mention the result only at Karoubi envelope as I think this is kind of a butterfly at Karoubi though a beautiful one but an important result for manifolds.

   Unfortunately, I am lacking chocolat medals (as well as the authority to award them), but thanks to the author (presumably Todd) who graced Karoubi envelope with the proof that smooth manifolds result from open sets by idempotent splitting.

   I have added a reference to Lawvere’s Perugia notes where this appeared as an exercise.

   Entre parenthèses: it appears to me that it’d be better to have the proof at the page for smooth manifolds and to mention the result only at Karoubi envelope as I think this is kind of a butterfly at Karoubi though a beautiful one but an important result for manifolds.

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
   • CommentTimeAug 5th 2014
   • PermaLink
   Author: Todd_Trimble
   Format: MarkdownItexIt would be fine with me either to move it to or reproduce it at [[smooth manifold]], but it would also be interesting to think of how this result relates to results already there at that article.

   It would be fine with me either to move it to or reproduce it at smooth manifold, but it would also be interesting to think of how this result relates to results already there at that article.

3. • CommentRowNumber3.
   • CommentAuthorThomas Holder
   • CommentTimeAug 6th 2014
   • PermaLink
   Author: Thomas Holder
   Format: MarkdownItexI've reproduced the proof at [[manifold]] as this seems to me strategically the best place in proximity of the general disucssion on piecing together there. Feel free to rectify my remarks or headings or placement there! A notice of the result should be dropped at [[smooth manifold]] as well. As the proof requires a lemma on [[Karoubi envelopes]] I thought it best to leave a complete version of the proof there.

   I’ve reproduced the proof at manifold as this seems to me strategically the best place in proximity of the general disucssion on piecing together there. Feel free to rectify my remarks or headings or placement there!

   A notice of the result should be dropped at smooth manifold as well. As the proof requires a lemma on Karoubi envelopes I thought it best to leave a complete version of the proof there.

4. • CommentRowNumber4.
   • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
   • CommentTimeAug 6th 2014
   • PermaLink
   Author: Todd_Trimble
   Format: MarkdownItexYeah, I was hoping *not* to put it at [[manifold]], since that article discusses a very general notion of manifold going well beyond smooth manifold, and the result doesn't carry over to the general notion. For example, it doesn't hold for topological manifolds. It would be nice to determine how general the result can be made.

   Yeah, I was hoping not to put it at manifold, since that article discusses a very general notion of manifold going well beyond smooth manifold, and the result doesn’t carry over to the general notion. For example, it doesn’t hold for topological manifolds.

   It would be nice to determine how general the result can be made.

5. • CommentRowNumber5.
   • CommentAuthorThomas Holder
   • CommentTimeAug 6th 2014
   • (edited Aug 7th 2014)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Thomas Holder
   Format: MarkdownItexThis was what I meant with 'strategically': people who look up the discussion at manifold are more likely to wonder how this fits into the general philosophy of 'manifold' and what is the generality of the result. Someone who just wants to look up the usual definition gets a pointer to idempotent splittings and the Lawvere remark sits nicely before the tangent bundle section which struggles with charts whereas [[smooth manifold]] is geared to $\infty$-theory. But as the content is mainly your work I don't want to impose, so if you feel uncomfortable with this just give a sign and I will restore the entry.

   This was what I meant with ’strategically’: people who look up the discussion at manifold are more likely to wonder how this fits into the general philosophy of ’manifold’ and what is the generality of the result. Someone who just wants to look up the usual definition gets a pointer to idempotent splittings and the Lawvere remark sits nicely before the tangent bundle section which struggles with charts whereas smooth manifold is geared to $\infty$-theory. But as the content is mainly your work I don’t want to impose, so if you feel uncomfortable with this just give a sign and I will restore the entry.

6. • CommentRowNumber6.
   • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
   • CommentTimeAug 6th 2014
   • PermaLink
   Author: Mike Shulman
   Format: MarkdownItexI agree that [[smooth manifold]] is a better place for it.

   I agree that smooth manifold is a better place for it.

7. • CommentRowNumber7.
   • CommentAuthorThomas Holder
   • CommentTimeAug 7th 2014
   • PermaLink
   Author: Thomas Holder
   Format: MarkdownItexI've moved the text from [[manfold]] to [[smooth manifold]].

   I’ve moved the text from manfold to smooth manifold.

8. • CommentRowNumber8.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeAug 10th 2014
   • (edited Aug 10th 2014)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexThanks for the nice edits! The text should link to [[Whitney embedding theorem]]. (Myself, I am quasi-offline for the time being.)

   Thanks for the nice edits!

   The text should link to Whitney embedding theorem. (Myself, I am quasi-offline for the time being.)

9. • CommentRowNumber9.
   • CommentAuthorThomas Holder
   • CommentTimeAug 10th 2014
   • PermaLink
   Author: Thomas Holder
   Format: MarkdownItexI am merely copy&paste here, the text is almost 100% Trimble not to forget this guy 'Zack' from MO who provided the keys to the proof. a really nice piece! I might eventually provide the link, though I would have to look into the entries to see what you have in mind exactly.

   I am merely copy&paste here, the text is almost 100% Trimble not to forget this guy ’Zack’ from MO who provided the keys to the proof. a really nice piece!

   I might eventually provide the link, though I would have to look into the entries to see what you have in mind exactly.