## Not signed in

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

## Site Tag Cloud

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

• CommentRowNumber1.
• CommentAuthorelif
• CommentTimeMar 10th 2017
In https://arxiv.org/pdf/1208.6265.pdf, why does Majıd need the condition (1) in the definition 2.1?
• CommentRowNumber2.
• CommentAuthorDavidRoberts
• CommentTimeMar 10th 2017
• (edited Mar 10th 2017)

Better formatting and linking to the abstract page: Strict quantum 2-groups

• CommentRowNumber3.
• CommentAuthorelif
• CommentTimeMar 11th 2017
Ok. Why does Majıd need the condition (1) in the definition 2.1?
• CommentRowNumber4.
• CommentAuthorTobyBartels
• CommentTimeMay 31st 2017

I assume that you're asking why he needs the equation

$h_{(1)} \otimes h_{(2)} \triangleright a = h_{(2)} \otimes h_{(1)} \triangleright a$

(for $h$ in the ground Hopf algebra $H$ and $a$ in the Hopf $H$-algebra $A$), rather than the entire set-up in that condition; without that set-up (consisting of $H$ and $A$ themselves), you'd have nothing to talk about.

I don't remember enough about Hopf algebras to answer your question either, but I'm trying to understand it. ☺️