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 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 nforum 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.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeMar 15th 2019
    • (edited Mar 15th 2019)

    Felix Wellen has been thinking about the following, maybe somebody has further thoughts:

    Currently an open problem is to get an intrinsic construction of differential cohesion, hence of the infinitesimal shape modality and/or the smooth real line in some analogy to how Mike’s real cohesion gets the shape modality from the topological real line constructed internally, in arXiv:1509.07584.

    But if we take the base topos of the cohesion to be the Boolean ¬¬-subtopos, so that

    ¬¬

    (at least on 0-types?) then we may define infinitesimal disks to be the types 𝔻 with

    𝔻*

    (as in “logical topology”).

    Then one could try to define as the localization at these 𝔻.

    But also, the infinitesimal disks should know about the smooth real line. For instance the Kock-Lawvere axioms gives that for the first order 1d disk 𝔻1(1) we have [𝔻1(1),𝔻1(1)]*/, with the correct smooth real line on the right.

    So the collection of the 𝔻-s, as above, should be enough to know the smooth 1, but I am not sure. If so, one could then declare the shape modality to be localization at this smooth 1.

    Maybe if all fits together, this construction could exhibit canonical differential cohesion.

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeMar 15th 2019

    Interesting thought. Of course there are obstacles to overcome, e.g. it’s not clear that there are only a small number of such 𝔻, or how to identify one of them to call 𝔻1(1).

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeMar 15th 2019

    So Felix had this thought (if I may share this here) that the subobject of Prop which is classified by Prop¬¬Prop should be something like the universal formal disk, and that should be the commutative part of its endomorphism ring. While I appreciate where he is headed, I don’t see through this yet.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeMar 17th 2019

    BTW, the equation =¬¬ only holds for (-1)-types (as it must, since ¬¬X is always a (-1)-type while preserves n-types for all n). Also, I would expect that even in continuous -groupoids, where there are no infinitesimals as such, there are still lots of (non-concrete) types X with X=*.

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeMar 17th 2019

    BTW, the equation =¬¬ only holds for (-1)-types (as it must, since ¬¬X is always a (-1)-type while preserves n-types for all n).

    Thanks, of course. I was misled by thinking about subtoposes labeled J=J¬¬, but of course that just means that and ¬¬ give the same Lawvere-Tierney operator.

    Still, I suppose it means we can define constructively in terms of ¬¬, right? And all corresponding to Boolean subtoposes should arise this way, I suppose.

    I would expect that even in continuous -groupoids, where there are no infinitesimals as such, there are still lots of (non-concrete) types X with X=*.

    Hm, right. Maybe. Hm…

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeMar 17th 2019

    I suppose it means we can define constructively in terms of ¬¬, right?

    Well, modulo hypercompletion. Assuming propositional resizing, we can nullify all the ¬¬-closed propositions to yield a topological subtopos of double-negation sheaves, and then coincides with this on all n-types for finite n (8.13 in BFP). It’s not immediately obvious that they coincide on untruncated types. But probably they do in the examples given that Gpd is hypercomplete? I haven’t thought about this carefully.

    And all corresponding to Boolean subtoposes should arise this way, I suppose.

    Not all Boolean subtoposes are the double-negation sheaves, even in 1-topos theory. As a trivial case, the trivial subtopos is also Boolean.