Not signed in (Sign In)

Start a new discussion

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 beauty bundles calculus categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-theory cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology 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 foundations functional-analysis functor galois-theory gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry goodwillie-calculus graph graphs gravity grothendieck group-theory harmonic-analysis higher higher-algebra higher-category-theory higher-differential-geometry higher-geometry higher-lie-theory higher-topos-theory history homological homological-algebra homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory infinity integration-theory internal-categories k-theory kan lie lie-theory limit limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic manifolds mathematics measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology nonassociative noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pasting philosophy physics planar 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 string-theory subobject superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory 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.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJan 16th 2010

    I worked on brushing up (infinity,1)-category a little

    • mostly I added in a section on homotopical categories, using some paragraphs from Andre Joyal's message to the CatTheory mailing list.

    • in this context I also rearranged the order of the subsections

    • I removed in the introduction the link to the page "Why (oo,1)-categories" and instead expanded the Idea section a bit.

    • added a paragraph to the beginning of the subsection on model categories

    • added the new Dugger/Spivak references on the relation between quasi-cats and SSet-cats (added that also to quasi-category and to relation between quasi-categories and simplicial categories)

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeFeb 28th 2012

    Looking back at (infinity,1)-category I found that lots of context was missing there.

    As a first step in an attempt to correct this, I created a subsection “Properties” with some pointers to relevant other entries.

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthoradeelkh
    • CommentTimeMay 14th 2013
    • (edited May 14th 2013)

    I added the reference

    • Omar Antolín Camarena, A whirlwind tour of the world of $(\infty,1)$-categories (arXiv)

    This introduction to higher category theory is intended to a give the reader an intuition for what $(\infty,1)$-categories are, when they are an appropriate tool, how they fit into the landscape of higher category, how concepts from ordinary category theory generalize to this new setting, and what uses people have put the theory to. It is a rough guide to a vast terrain, focuses on ideas and motivation, omits almost all proofs and technical details, and provides many references.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorTim_Porter
    • CommentTimeAug 12th 2013
    • (edited Aug 12th 2013)

    In the entry on (infinity,1)-category there is the phrase:an (∞,1)-category is an internal to in ∞-groupoids/basic homotopy theory.

    I tried to see how to clear up the grammar, but it was not clear to me what the wording was intended to be. There was a previous version:

    To some extent an (∞,1)-category can be thought of as a category enriched in (∞,0)-categories, namely in ∞-groupoids.

    That is vague, so needed changing, but there seem to be ’typos’ in the current version.

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorZhen Lin
    • CommentTimeAug 12th 2013

    It was probably supposed to be “an internal category in …” or “a category internal to …”.

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorTim_Porter
    • CommentTimeAug 12th 2013
    • (edited Aug 12th 2013)

    Yes, but is that completely correct? The ‘enriched’ version to me was clearer. Is an (∞,1)-category really an internal category in ∞-groupoids, as that would mean the object of objects would be an ∞-groupoid, or am I mistaken?

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeAug 12th 2013
    • (edited Aug 12th 2013)

    Thanks for catching that, I have fixed the sentence now and expanded it such as to read as follows:


    More precisely, this is the notion of category up to coherent homotopy: an (,1)(\infty,1)-category is equivalently


    Is an (∞,1)-category really an internal category in ∞-groupoids, as that would mean the object of objects would be an ∞-groupoid,

    Yes, it’s the completeness condition of complete Segal spaces that takes care of this issue. Details are at internal category in an (∞,1)-category.

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeFeb 6th 2015

    Added pointer to the new preprint by Ayala and Rozenblyum. Though it doesn’t seem to have the previously announced statement about (,n)(\infty,n)-categories with duals yet.

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeFeb 7th 2015

    Has anything more been made of the other approach to stratified spaces where one moves up through strata and back down again? You may remember that discussion at the Cafe here. It gave rise to Transversal homotopy theory by Jon Woolf, who also wrote a paper mentioned by Ayala and Rozenblyum, The fundamental category of a stratified space.

    The idea was to give fundamental categories with duals.

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJan 19th 2016
    • (edited Jan 19th 2016)

    have added pointer to

    • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthorDavidRoberts
    • CommentTimeApr 24th 2018

    Added reference to Riehl-Verity’s book.

    diff, v73, current

    • CommentRowNumber12.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeSep 12th 2018
    • (edited Sep 12th 2018)

    added pointer to

    diff, v76, current

Add your comments
  • Please log in or leave your comment as a "guest post". If commenting as a "guest", please include your name in the message as a courtesy. Note: only certain categories allow guest posts.
  • To produce a hyperlink to an nLab entry, simply put double square brackets around its name, e.g. [[category]]. To use (La)TeX mathematics in your post, make sure Markdown+Itex is selected below and put your mathematics between dollar signs as usual. Only a subset of the usual TeX math commands are accepted: see here for a list.

  • (Help)