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 definitions 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 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.
   • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
   • CommentTimeDec 3rd 2014
   • PermaLink
   Author: Todd_Trimble
   Format: MarkdownItexI think there was some terminological confusion, where the nLab defined [[Segal's category]] $\Gamma$ to be a skeleton of finite pointed sets; I think it should be the category opposite to that. I've made edits at this article and at [[Gamma-space]].

   I think there was some terminological confusion, where the nLab defined Segal’s category $\Gamma$ to be a skeleton of finite pointed sets; I think it should be the category opposite to that. I’ve made edits at this article and at Gamma-space.

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthorTim_Porter
   • CommentTimeDec 3rd 2014
   • PermaLink
   Author: Tim_Porter
   Format: MarkdownItexI have a memory (possibly false) of seeing both $\Gamma$ and its opposite called Segal's category, so the main thing is to be reasonably consistent through any pages that use the term.

   I have a memory (possibly false) of seeing both $\Gamma$ and its opposite called Segal’s category, so the main thing is to be reasonably consistent through any pages that use the term.

3. • CommentRowNumber3.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeDec 3rd 2014
   • (edited Dec 3rd 2014)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexThanks Todd, for looking into this. In my experience (say from the beginnings of some seminar talks), as Tim says, people tend to disagree on this convention. But I suppose there is of course one that is really the original convention, and to the extend that we manage to, it would be good to try to stick to that, as you do. Thanks.

   Thanks Todd, for looking into this. In my experience (say from the beginnings of some seminar talks), as Tim says, people tend to disagree on this convention. But I suppose there is of course one that is really the original convention, and to the extend that we manage to, it would be good to try to stick to that, as you do. Thanks.

4. • CommentRowNumber4.
   • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
   • CommentTimeDec 3rd 2014
   • PermaLink
   Author: Mike Shulman
   Format: MarkdownItexThe problem, of course, is that the original definition of $\Gamma$ makes it analogous not to $\Delta$ but to $\Delta^{op}$. That makes it very tempting to redefine "$\Gamma$" (perhaps even accidentally) so that it agrees with all other shape categories like $\Delta$, where the "geometric shapes" in question are presheaves on the category. One solution is to just discard the notation $\Gamma$ and use something else like $FinSet_\ast$ or $\mathcal{F}$...

   The problem, of course, is that the original definition of $\Gamma$ makes it analogous not to $\Delta$ but to $\Delta^{op}$. That makes it very tempting to redefine “$\Gamma$” (perhaps even accidentally) so that it agrees with all other shape categories like $\Delta$, where the “geometric shapes” in question are presheaves on the category. One solution is to just discard the notation $\Gamma$ and use something else like $FinSet_\ast$ or $\mathcal{F}$…

5. • CommentRowNumber5.
   • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
   • CommentTimeDec 3rd 2014
   • PermaLink
   Author: Todd_Trimble
   Format: MarkdownItexThis may all be true, but unfortunately the articles were not even consistent with themselves! E.g. under the definition which was originally there, it was claimed that presheaves on $\Gamma$ classify pointed objects. But this is true only if we change to Segal's original definition, where the forgetful functor $\Gamma^{op} = FinSet_\ast \to Set$ is the generic model.

   This may all be true, but unfortunately the articles were not even consistent with themselves! E.g. under the definition which was originally there, it was claimed that presheaves on $\Gamma$ classify pointed objects. But this is true only if we change to Segal’s original definition, where the forgetful functor $\Gamma^{op} = FinSet_\ast \to Set$ is the generic model.

6. • CommentRowNumber6.
   • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
   • CommentTimeDec 3rd 2014
   • PermaLink
   Author: Mike Shulman
   Format: MarkdownItexOh certainly; I didn't mean to imply otherwise. Thanks for fixing it!

   Oh certainly; I didn’t mean to imply otherwise. Thanks for fixing it!