Not signed in (Sign In)

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 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 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 sheaves 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

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
    • CommentTimeApr 12th 2018

    added pointer to Bredon 72. Will add this pointer also to various related entries on equivariant homotopy theory

    diff, v13, current

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeOct 21st 2019

    made explicit the basic examples of GG-spaces induced from liner representations: Euclidean G-spaces, representation spheres and “representation tori” (here). Also added a simple illustration

    diff, v16, current

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeOct 21st 2020

    added pointer to:

    diff, v21, current

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeNov 10th 2020

    added projective G-spaces to the list of examples

    diff, v22, current

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeApr 6th 2021
    • (edited Apr 6th 2021)

    Fixed the pdf link for

    • Bert Guillou, A short note on models for equivariant homotopy theory (pdf)

    (I was looking for any author who would speak about how the forgetful functor from topological GG-spaces to topological spaces creates limits. Anyone?)

    diff, v26, current

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeApr 7th 2021
    • (edited Apr 7th 2021)

    am starting a Properties-section “Change of groups and fixed loci” with the intent to spell out in full detail how any homomorphism of topological groups induces an adjoint triple of functors between the corresponding TopologicalGSpacesTopological G Spaces, and how the cross-composite of this adjoint triple with itself yields the fixed locus-adjunction.

    So far I have spelled out the step that is usually being glossed over: The coinduced action adjunction (here).

    (The same or analogous discussion could be at G-set or at action or even elsewhere. But for definiteness, I am now typing it out here.)

    diff, v28, current

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeApr 7th 2021

    A link to the ’General abstract formulation in homotopy type theory’ section of induced representation?

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeApr 7th 2021

    Sure. Feel free to edit, I am out of the page for the moment. Typesetting the big composite adjunction locally.

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeApr 7th 2021

    Have added

    (See also at induced representation for a formulation in homotopy type theory.)

    diff, v29, current

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeApr 7th 2021
    • (edited Apr 7th 2021)

    I have now added the composite adjunction diagram that I was after (here):

    forming fixed loci with residual Weyl-group action is the composite of a “pull-push” of (co)induced actions through the correspondence GN(H)W(H)G \leftarrow N(H) \rightarrow W(H) and is thus, in particular, exhibited as a right adjoint.

    diff, v31, current

    • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeApr 8th 2021

    For what it’s worth, I have completed the discussion of the change-of-equivariance-group adjoint triple (here) with its pull-push application to Weyl-group-equivariant fixed loci (here).

    Also added the pointer to Section I.1 in May 96, where this is essentially mentioned.

    I tried to find it being mentioned in tom Dieck’s writings, but haven’t seen it there. Nor elsewhere, actually (e.g. not in Blumberg’s lectures).

    It’s of course not a big deal. But it would seem to be the first thing you want to at least mention in any semi-comprehensive discussion of equivariant topology.

    diff, v34, current

    • CommentRowNumber12.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeApr 10th 2021

    Added this statement:

    Let GG be a compact topological group and let f:XYf \colon X \longrightarrow Y be morphism of Hausdorff GG-spaces.

    Then its quotient naturality square

    X f Y X/G f/G Y/G \array{ X &\overset{f}{\longrightarrow}& Y \\ \big\downarrow && \big\downarrow \\ X/G &\overset{f/G}{\longrightarrow}& Y/G }

    is a pullback square if and only if ff preserves isotropy groups.

    From Prop. 4.1 in:

    • Alexander Bykov, Raúl Juárez Flores G-fibrations and twisted products, Topology and its Applications Volume 196, Part B, December 2015, Pages 379-397 (doi:10.1016/j.topol.2015.05.011)

    diff, v35, current

    • CommentRowNumber13.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeApr 11th 2021

    made more explicit in the Lemma what it means to “preserve isotropy groups”


    added the remark that the assumption of the Lemma is met as soon as both actions are free, in which case the Lemma gives the statement familiar for morphisms between principal bundles, without however needing to assume them to be locally trivial (here)

    diff, v36, current

    • CommentRowNumber14.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeApr 14th 2021
    • (edited Apr 14th 2021)


    Given a semidirect product group G^ΓG\widehat G \coloneqq \Gamma \rtimes G and a subgroup G xGG_x \subset G with induced semidirect product subgroup G^ xΓG x\widehat G_x \coloneqq \Gamma \rtimes G_x, these form a commuting square of inclusions, and “induction-restriction” through this square equals “restriction-induction” through the square, in that we have a GG-equivariant natural isomorphism of this form:

    G× G xPG^× G^ xP. G \times_{G_x }P \simeq \widehat G \times_{\widehat G_x} P \,.

    This iso is elementary in components, but apparently it wants to lead a more high-brow life as a special case of a Beck-Chevalley property for the change-of-transformation-groups adjunction.

    What’s a good general condition satisfied by this square of inclusions of subgroups under which the Beck-Chevalley property for induction/restriction of the transformations groups holds more generally? And why?

    • CommentRowNumber15.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeApr 14th 2021

    added also pointer to p. 8 of

    for discussion of the change-of-groups adjoint triple

    diff, v38, current

    • CommentRowNumber16.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeApr 14th 2021


    What, if any, is a large class of GG-spaces XX such that their simplicial presheaf (G/HSing(X H))(G/H \mapsto Sing(X^H)) is projectively cofibrant?

    • CommentRowNumber17.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 23rd 2021

    added a cross-link remark (here) from the cofree topological action to cofree simplicial group actions

    diff, v39, current

    • CommentRowNumber18.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeSep 17th 2021

    added pointer to:

    diff, v43, current

    • CommentRowNumber19.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeSep 22nd 2021

    added pointer to

    diff, v44, current

    • CommentRowNumber20.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeNov 10th 2021

    I have added (here) statement and proof that the forgetful functor from GG-spaces to underlying spaces creates all limits and colimits.

    diff, v45, current

    • CommentRowNumber21.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeNov 10th 2021

    I have added (here) statement and proof of the corollary that compactly generated GG-spaces form a regular category.

    diff, v46, current