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 definitions 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 nlab noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory object 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.
   • CommentAuthorDmitri Pavlov
   • CommentTimeAug 8th 2018
   • PermaLink
   Author: Dmitri Pavlov
   Format: MarkdownItexConsider a model category M and a bifibrant replacement functor R: M→M. Define a new category M' with the same objects as M by setting hom_M'(X,Y) := hom_M(R(X),R(Y)), with the obvious notions of composition and identity. The category M' behaves in an intuitively correct way: homotopies are well-behaved, homotopy classes of pointed maps S^n→X compute the homotopy groups of X, etc. What would be a good name for morphisms of M'? For instance, one could say for M=sSet: > for any integer d there is a (⋯) map S^n→S^n of degree d, where S^n=Δ^n/∂Δ^n is the standard simplicial sphere. What would be a good substitute for (⋯)? I am currently considering “weak map” and “derived map”, and possibly “∞-map”, but perhaps there are better alternatives. Of course, one could say “a point in the derived mapping space”, but this is a rather awkward name for such a simple idea. I do not want to restrict to bifibrant objects in M (where one could talk about ordinary maps in M), since in the case M=sSet this would eliminate all finite nondiscrete simplicial sets, which are an important source of examples.

   Consider a model category M and a bifibrant replacement functor R: M→M.

   Define a new category M’ with the same objects as M by setting hom_M’(X,Y) := hom_M(R(X),R(Y)), with the obvious notions of composition and identity.

   The category M’ behaves in an intuitively correct way: homotopies are well-behaved, homotopy classes of pointed maps S^n→X compute the homotopy groups of X, etc.

   What would be a good name for morphisms of M’?

   For instance, one could say for M=sSet:

   for any integer d there is a (⋯) map S^n→S^n of degree d, where S^n=Δ^n/∂Δ^n is the standard simplicial sphere.

   What would be a good substitute for (⋯)?

   I am currently considering “weak map” and “derived map”, and possibly “∞-map”, but perhaps there are better alternatives.

   Of course, one could say “a point in the derived mapping space”, but this is a rather awkward name for such a simple idea.

   I do not want to restrict to bifibrant objects in M (where one could talk about ordinary maps in M), since in the case M=sSet this would eliminate all finite nondiscrete simplicial sets, which are an important source of examples.

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
   • CommentTimeAug 9th 2018
   • PermaLink
   Author: Mike Shulman
   Format: MarkdownItexI think 'weak' and 'derived' are reasonable adjectives. Stretching an analogy one might also call it an 'ana-map'.

   I think ’weak’ and ’derived’ are reasonable adjectives. Stretching an analogy one might also call it an ’ana-map’.

3. • CommentRowNumber3.
   • CommentAuthorDmitri Pavlov
   • CommentTimeAug 9th 2018
   • (edited Aug 10th 2018)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Dmitri Pavlov
   Format: MarkdownItexI just discovered that the page [[homotopical cohomology theory]] (a rather weird name) refers to a similar concept as ana-morphisms, using zigzags instead of bifibrant replacements. And Urs refers to these as ∞-anafunctors in DCCT, §1.2.5.2.1. Considering the centrality of this concept for everything that concerns homotopy theory, a standardized name would be highly beneficial. Perhaps a reasonable choice would be to refer to 0-simplices of homs of [[hammock localization]]s as anamaps. Anamaps organize into a category, there is a natural notion of homotopy of anamaps (namely, a zigzag of 1-simplices in the above homs), and if an anamap is a weak equivalence (i.e., becomes invertible in the homotopy category), then it is invertible up to a homotopy.

   I just discovered that the page homotopical cohomology theory (a rather weird name) refers to a similar concept as ana-morphisms, using zigzags instead of bifibrant replacements.

   And Urs refers to these as ∞-anafunctors in DCCT, §1.2.5.2.1.

   Considering the centrality of this concept for everything that concerns homotopy theory, a standardized name would be highly beneficial.

   Perhaps a reasonable choice would be to refer to 0-simplices of homs of hammock localizations as anamaps. Anamaps organize into a category, there is a natural notion of homotopy of anamaps (namely, a zigzag of 1-simplices in the above homs), and if an anamap is a weak equivalence (i.e., becomes invertible in the homotopy category), then it is invertible up to a homotopy.