Not signed in

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

• Username
• Password
• Remember me

• Sign in using OpenID
• Remember me

• Forgot your password?
• Apply for membership

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 internal-categories k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology 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 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

1. • CommentRowNumber1.
   • CommentAuthorHarry Gindi
   • CommentTimeMay 12th 2018
   • PermaLink
   Author: Harry Gindi
   Format: MarkdownItexA while back, a friend of mine mentioned that Lax n-functors between strict n-categories are related to maps between the associated (unmarked) Street Nerves in the 2-categorical case at least. Is the correspondence bijective? If it is, does it generalize to the case n>2? If it isn't, can we identify a particular subset of simplicial maps between the nerves that arise from lax functors in the case n=2? In the case n>2? If so, I think it would be nice to add this to the nLab. The only source I have found on this is a paper of Jonathan Chiche, but he only seems to use the fact that lax 2-functors give rise to maps on the Street nerves in order to define weak equivalences (a lax functor is called a weak equivalence if the induced map on Street nerves is a weak equivalence of simplicial sets).

   A while back, a friend of mine mentioned that Lax n-functors between strict n-categories are related to maps between the associated (unmarked) Street Nerves in the 2-categorical case at least. Is the correspondence bijective? If it is, does it generalize to the case n>2? If it isn’t, can we identify a particular subset of simplicial maps between the nerves that arise from lax functors in the case n=2? In the case n>2?

   If so, I think it would be nice to add this to the nLab. The only source I have found on this is a paper of Jonathan Chiche, but he only seems to use the fact that lax 2-functors give rise to maps on the Street nerves in order to define weak equivalences (a lax functor is called a weak equivalence if the induced map on Street nerves is a weak equivalence of simplicial sets).

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
   • CommentTimeMay 12th 2018
   • PermaLink
   Author: Mike Shulman
   Format: MarkdownItexI think the correspondence is bijective on *normal* lax 2-functors. I believe Nick Gurski proved this, but I don't know whether he ever published it. For $n\gt 2$ I don't even know exactly what a "lax $n$-functor" is. Is it lax at all dimensions simultaneously? How do the constraints interact?

   I think the correspondence is bijective on normal lax 2-functors. I believe Nick Gurski proved this, but I don’t know whether he ever published it. For $n\gt 2$ I don’t even know exactly what a “lax $n$-functor” is. Is it lax at all dimensions simultaneously? How do the constraints interact?

3. • CommentRowNumber3.
   • CommentAuthorHarry Gindi
   • CommentTimeMay 12th 2018
   • (edited May 12th 2018)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Harry Gindi
   Format: MarkdownItexI guess I meant normal lax functors, since this is, I believe, what Chiche was using. I'll send Nick an e-mail maybe.Thanks!

   I guess I meant normal lax functors, since this is, I believe, what Chiche was using.

   I’ll send Nick an e-mail maybe.Thanks!