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-categories 2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry bundles calculus categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-theory cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science connection constructive cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality education elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration foundations functional-analysis functor gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry graph graphs gravity 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 infinity integration integration-theory k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure measure-theory modal-logic model model-category-theory monads monoid monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology multicategories 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 science set set-theory sheaf simplicial space spin-geometry stable-homotopy-theory stack string 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).
  1. Added to flabby sheaf several characterizations of flabbiness, an external one which, unlike the usual definition, is manifestly local, and several internal ones.

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeMar 29th 2016


    (Should the entry not state the definition in more generality than over sites of opens?)

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorZhen Lin
    • CommentTimeMar 29th 2016

    It’s not obvious to me what the correct generalisation is in that case. I like Ingo’s definition (4), but the special role of subsingletons makes me wonder if this concept really makes sense in the non-localic case.

  2. Right. I still have to think about it. But consider the following: If UXU \to X is part of a covering family in the site of open subsets of a space XX, then UU is intuitively a part of XX and it makes sense to ask whether (X)(U)\mathcal{F}(X) \to \mathcal{F}(U) is surjective. However, if instead UXU \to X is part of a covering family in an arbitrary site, then UU is not necessarily a part of XX and the question isn’t as meaningful. For example, consider the étale covering X⨿XXX \amalg X \to X. Almost always (X⨿X)=(X) 2(X)\mathcal{F}(X \amalg X) = \mathcal{F}(X)^2 \to \mathcal{F}(X) will not be surjective.

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeMar 29th 2016

    makes me wonder if this concept really makes sense in the non-localic case.

    But presently the entry does not even state it in the generality of locales.

  3. Ah, okay. I’ll fix that; very minor changes suffice for this (replace “open set” by “open” and “for every xXx \in X there exists an open neighbourhood of xx” by “there exists a covering of XX”).

  4. Added the formulation in the localic case and added the link to partial map classifier: The object P 1(F)P_{\leq 1}(F) of subsingletons of FF classifies partial maps into FF.

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorspitters
    • CommentTimeNov 8th 2016

    Is there a generalization of this notion which does not require it to be a sheaf? A quasi-topos has uniqueness, but not existence. Is there a dual notion which has existence, but not uniqueness? The context is the Charles Rezk’s answer on the connection between sSets and sheaves.

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeMar 28th 2019

    Added recent references that discuss flabbiness and related injectivity internally.

    diff, v16, current

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorjonsterling
    • CommentTimeMar 31st 2019
    In mathematics, flabbiness seems to have been considered mostly for sheaves, but I am recalling that flabbiness also comes up in _presheaf models_ that type theorists use to explain programming languages; in this area of the literature, such a presheaf is sometimes called "total". For instance, in the topos of trees, the flabby presheaves have a useful property -- a certain modality (the "later modality") can be commuted with the existential quantifier over a flabby object. Is this of interest?
  5. @jonsterling: This is most definitely of interest! Can you recommend any pointers?
    • CommentRowNumber12.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeMar 31st 2019

    Added citation to Kock (thanks Ingo)

    diff, v17, current

    • CommentRowNumber13.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeApr 1st 2019

    Could we add something about Godement resolutions here? That’s where the monad concept first makes it’s appearance, in 1958, no?

    I brought this construction up a few months ago, here. Hmm, so why do we put the emphasis on comonad at Roger Godement?

    • CommentRowNumber14.
    • CommentAuthorjonsterling
    • CommentTimeApr 1st 2019
    • (edited Apr 1st 2019)

    @IngoBlechschmidt Here is such a reference: First Steps in Synthetic Guarded Domain Theory: Step-Indexing in the Topos of Trees

    What they use flabbiness / “totality” for is the following. In this topos (presheaves on ω\omega), there is an operator ϕ\rhd \phi on propositions (pronounced “later ϕ\phi”) which has ϕϕ\phi \supset \rhd\phi and (ϕϕ)ϕ(\rhd\phi\supset\phi)\supset\phi which is used to reason about fixed points, which are fundamental in computer science. In addition to commuting with conjunction and implication and binary disjunction, there are two useful interactions of this modality with the quantifiers, fixing ϕ:X×YΩ\phi:X\times Y\to\Omega:

    1. x:X(y:Y.ϕ(x,y))y:Y.ϕ(x,y)x : X \mid (\exists y:Y.\rhd \phi(x,y)) \vdash \rhd\exists y:Y.\phi(x,y)
    2. x:X(y:Y.ϕ(x,y))y:Y.ϕ(x,y))x : X \mid \rhd(\forall y:Y.\phi(x,y))\vdash \forall y:Y.\rhd\phi(x,y))

    Now, suppose that YY is flabby/”total”; then (2) holds in the opposite direction. Supposing that YY is flabby/”total” and is additionally inhabited (in the sense that y:Y.\exists y:Y.\top is true, not in the sense of having a global element), then (1) holds in the opposite direction.

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)