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.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeFeb 19th 2019
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexA minimum, for the moment just so as to record the articles by Illman <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/equivariant+triangulation+theorem/1">v1</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/equivariant+triangulation+theorem">current</a>

   A minimum, for the moment just so as to record the articles by Illman

   v1, current

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthorDmitri Pavlov
   • CommentTimeJul 9th 2022
   • PermaLink
   Author: Dmitri Pavlov
   Format: MarkdownItexAdded: These results continue to hold when $G$ is not [[compact]], see \cite{Illman00}. * {#Illman00} [[Sören Illman]], _Existence and uniqueness of equivariant triangulations of smooth proper G-manifolds with some applications to equivariant Whitehead torsion_, J. Reine Angew. Math. 524 (2000), 129–183. [doi](https://doi.org/10.1515/crll.2000.054). <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/equivariant+triangulation+theorem/7">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/equivariant+triangulation+theorem/7">v7</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/equivariant+triangulation+theorem">current</a>

   Added:

   These results continue to hold when $G$ is not compact, see \cite{Illman00}.

   • {#Illman00} Sören Illman, Existence and uniqueness of equivariant triangulations of smooth proper G-manifolds with some applications to equivariant Whitehead torsion, J. Reine Angew. Math. 524 (2000), 129–183. doi.

   diff, v7, current

3. • CommentRowNumber3.
   • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
   • CommentTimeJul 10th 2022
   • PermaLink
   Author: David_Corfield
   Format: MarkdownItexHow does comparison with the plain case, [[triangulation theorem]], look with regard to: > Conversely, deep theorems assert that a given kind of triangulation does not generally exists for a given class of manifolds.

   How does comparison with the plain case, triangulation theorem, look with regard to:

   Conversely, deep theorems assert that a given kind of triangulation does not generally exists for a given class of manifolds.

4. • CommentRowNumber4.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeJul 10th 2022
   • (edited Jul 10th 2022)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexMy understanding is that the equivariant case is much harder and that there is not essentially more work on it than listed in the entry (good though that Dmitri found one more reference previously missing), which all focuses on (equivariant) smooth triangulations of smooth manifolds. Of course, a trivial thing to be said is that when a given type of ordinary triangulation does not exist, then an equivariant version won't exist either.

   My understanding is that the equivariant case is much harder and that there is not essentially more work on it than listed in the entry (good though that Dmitri found one more reference previously missing), which all focuses on (equivariant) smooth triangulations of smooth manifolds.

   Of course, a trivial thing to be said is that when a given type of ordinary triangulation does not exist, then an equivariant version won’t exist either.

5. • CommentRowNumber5.
   • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
   • CommentTimeJul 10th 2022
   • PermaLink
   Author: David_Corfield
   Format: MarkdownItexThere are some remarks at MO [here](https://mathoverflow.net/q/371448/447).

   There are some remarks at MO here.