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).

Atrium > Mathematics, Physics & Philosophy: open problems in axiomatic cohesion

Bottom of Page

1 to 12 of 12

  1.  
    • CommentRowNumber1.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJul 18th 2018
    • (edited Jul 18th 2018)

    Since Dan and Felix and others asked me to list good problems (i.e. potential theorems of interest whose proof should be within reach) in cohesive/elastic/solid modal homotopy theory, I started making a list here. Just a start, for the moment.

    In addition to the problem of formalizing the fundamental theorem of calculus (i.e. Stokes theorem, an issue we had discussed at some length here a while back) there is so far only one new item: To show that the bosonic body of a supermanifold is an ordinary manifold (here).

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeJul 19th 2018

    How about something concerning PDEs? There was discussion of the h-principle.

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJul 19th 2018
    • (edited Jul 19th 2018)

    I am not sure which proposition one would try to show regarding the h-principle. But since just stating it seems to be a nice example of combining coreduction with shape, I have added a remark to the list, under “further directions” (here)

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeJul 20th 2018

    Could one generate some problems by specifying a cohesive/elastic/solid entity through a HIT and then looking to establish some property?

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJul 20th 2018

    David, not quite sure what you mean to suggest here. Are you thinking of automatically generating propositions? It seems unlikely to me that this will be fruitful. Instead, it takes the usual creativity of research mathematics here to come up with the right statements, and then with their proofs.

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJul 20th 2018
    • (edited Jul 20th 2018)

    Prodded by a request on the HoTT discussion group (here) I added an item Knot theoy to the list of “further directions” (i.e. the list of topics which should have a formalization in cohesive HoTT, but where I currently don’t know what a useful proposition to prove would be):

    The very idea of equivalence classes of knots (embeddings of smooth manifolds up to smooth isotopy) is one in differential cohesion (“elastic homotopy theory”), combining concepts of differential geometry (embeddings of smooth manifolds) with homotopy (a smooth isotopy between embeddings being a smooth homotopy/path in the smooth space of embeddings).

    This should lend itself to formalization in the differential cohesion (elasticity) fragment of (eq:TheProgressionOfModalities)

    ℜ ⊣ ℑ ⊣ & ∨ ∨ ʃ ⊣ ♭ ⊣ ♯ \array{ && \Re &\dashv& \Im &\dashv& \& \\ && && \vee && \vee \\ && && ʃ &\dashv& \flat &\dashv& \sharp }

    Using the infinitesimal shape modality ℑ\Im we may speak about smooth manifolds, as in Wellen 17, and form a homotopy type [Σ,X] emb↪[Σ,X][\Sigma,X]_{emb} \hookrightarrow [\Sigma,X] of embeddings of smooth manifolds. Then using the actual shape modality ʃʃ we obtain ʃ[Σ,X] embʃ [\Sigma,X]_{emb}. A path in this type is a smooth isotopy. Hence the 0-truncation

    Knots Σ(X)≔|ʃ[Σ,X] emb| 0 Knots_\Sigma(X) \;\coloneqq\; \big\vert ʃ [\Sigma,X]_{emb} \big\vert_0

    is the type of knots of form the Σ\Sigma in XX.

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeJul 20th 2018

    Re #5, no I just meant is there a chance to work out properties of specific entities rather than general results. Some of the first things achieved in synthetic homotopy theory were some homotopy groups of spheres. So how about proving something about a specific pde?

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeJul 20th 2018
    • (edited Jul 21st 2018)

    Or to tie in your #6 with my suggestion of specificity, how about establishing π 2V 2(ℝ 3)=0\pi_2 V_2(\mathbb{R}^3) = 0 showing all immersions of S 2S^2 into ℝ 3\mathbb{R}^3 are isotopic, mentioned in John Francis’s notes.

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeJul 20th 2018

    Well of course that’s the easy part. Establishing the Smale-Hirsch immersion theorem has to happen too.

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJul 20th 2018

    Regarding “specific entities”, I am wondering if we can get around the issue of not having a constructive definition of the smooth ℝ 1\mathbb{R}^1 by “cancelling two ambiguities” against each other:

    If we first declare that shape is homotopy localization at unspecified type 𝔸 1\mathbb{A}^1 and then focus on the shape of 𝔸 n\mathbb{A}^n-manifolds (with 𝔸 n≔(𝔸 1) × n\mathbb{A}^n \coloneqq (\mathbb{A}^1)^{\times_n}) we might still get somewhere.

    • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeJul 21st 2018

    You said somewhere that in the analytic supercohesive case that 𝔸 1\mathbb{A}^1 would be ℂ\mathbb{C}, i.e., shape is localization there. What does this mean for what can be expected to be provable about 𝔸 n\mathbb{A}^n-manifolds?

    • CommentRowNumber12.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJul 21st 2018
    • (edited Jul 21st 2018)

    I just realized that long ago I had already written out a proof that Aufhebung ℑX⇝≃ℑX\overset{\rightsquigarrow}{\Im X} \simeq \Im X implies that

    η X ℑ⇝≃η X⇝ ℑ \overset{\rightsquigarrow}{\eta^{\Im}_X} \;\simeq\; \eta^{\Im}_{\overset{\rightsquigarrow}{X}}

    Now reproduced here.

1 to 12 of 12

  1.