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 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

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.
    • CommentAuthorDmitri Pavlov
    • CommentTimeJun 18th 2018
    • (edited Jun 18th 2018)

    In the article cocylinder one reads at the bottom:

    George Whitehead, Elements of homotopy theory
    (This uses the terminology mapping path space.)
    

    (This was added in revision 3 by Mike Shulman.)

    However, I was unable to find any occurrence of this terminology in Whitehead’s book.

    Indeed, looking at the table on page 141 below Theorem 6.22, we see that Whitehead refers to the dual construction as the mapping cylinder I_f, whereas the original construction is denoted by I^f, but there is no name attached to it.

    Furthermore, on page 43 below Theorem 7.31 one reads:

    The process of replacing the map f: X→Y by the homotopically equivalent fibration p : I^f→Y
    is, in some sense, analogous to that of replacing f by the inclusion map of X into the mapping cylinder of f;
    the latter is a cofibration, rather than a fibration.
    Pursuing this analogy further, we may consider the fibre T^f of p over a designated point of Y.
    We shall call T^f the mapping fibre of f (resisting firmly the temptation to call I^f and T^f the mapping cocylinder and cocone of f!).
    
    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeJun 18th 2018

    I presume you mean the article cocylinder. That addition by me was based on this discussion in which Zoran attributes this terminology to Whitehead. Perhaps it is a different article of Whitehead’s? Or perhaps Zoran’s memory was wrong.

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorDmitri Pavlov
    • CommentTimeJun 18th 2018

    Re #2: Yes, indeed.

    The first occurrence of “mapping path space” that I was able to find in the literature is two articles by Peter Hilton from 1968 and 1969. Perhaps the terminology is due to him?

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeJun 18th 2018

    Beats me. There’s no reason we have to attribute it to anyone in particular, only note that it’s an alternative terminology.

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorDmitri Pavlov
    • CommentTimeJun 19th 2018

    I changed the article to indicate that Peter May’s books use this terminology.