Not signed in

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

Discussion Tag Cloud

Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

• CommentRowNumber1.
• CommentAuthorUrs
• CommentTimeDec 29th 2014
• (edited Dec 29th 2014)

For $X$ an object in a differentially cohesive infinity-topos, say that a framing of $X$ is a trivialization of the infinitesimal disk bundle $p :T_{inf} X \to X$, which is the homotopy pullback

$\array{ T_{inf} X &\longrightarrow& X \\ \downarrow^{\mathrlap{p}} && \downarrow \\ X &\longrightarrow& ʃ_{inf} X }$

of the unit at $X$ of the infinitesimal shape modality $ʃ_{inf}$ along itself.

Now it is a simple standard fact that Lie groups $G$ are canonically framed by left translation of their tangent space at the neutral element over the group.

In which generality does the analogous statement remain true for $\infty$-group objects in differentially cohesive $\infty$-toposes?

I suppose one is to proceed by the homotopy-Mayer-Vietoris sequence in the $\infty$-topos (see the other discussion): if $G$ is an $\infty$-group then (using also that $ʃ_{inf}$ preserves $\infty$-limits and $\infty$-colimits and hence $\infty$-group structure) the defining homotopy pullback diagram for $T_{inf}G$ is equivalently the following pasting of homotopy pullbacks

$\array{ T_{inf} G &\longrightarrow& \mathbb{D}_e &\longrightarrow& \ast \\ \downarrow && \downarrow && \downarrow^{\mathrlap{e}} \\ G \times G &\stackrel{(-)\cdot (-)^{-1}}{\longrightarrow}& G &\longrightarrow& ʃ_{inf} G }$

where hence $\mathbb{D}_e \to G$ is the infinitesimal neighbourhood of the neutral element in the $\infty$-group $G$.

Now I want to conclude that hence the left pullback square gives the desired trivialization statement $T_{inf} G \simeq G \times \mathbb{D}_e$.

What’s a good way to conclude this. If I have a 1-site of definition then I know that $G$ is presented by a presheaf of simplicial groups and then I may conclude by falling back to the 1-categorical statement.

But there is probably a better and more general argument.

• CommentRowNumber2.
• CommentAuthorUrs
• CommentTimeDec 30th 2014
• (edited Dec 30th 2014)

As Marc highlights here of course the statement directly follows from it being true in $\infty Grpd$ by arguing pointwise over a site of definition.

But is there also an internal argument?

• CommentRowNumber3.
• CommentAuthorUrs
• CommentTimeDec 30th 2014

I have added statement and proof of how every differentially cohesive $\infty$-group is canonically framed here.