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 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

1. • CommentRowNumber1.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeMar 26th 2010
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: Markdownedited [[decalage]] a bit there was the statement that <latex> Dec Y \to Y </latex> is a "fibration". I made that [[Kan fibration]]. Is that right?

   edited decalage a bit

   there was the statement that is a "fibration". I made that Kan fibration. Is that right?

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthorTim_Porter
   • CommentTimeMar 27th 2010
   • PermaLink
   Author: Tim_Porter
   Format: MarkdownIt certainly is a Kan fibration if Kis a simplicial group since it is clearly an epimorphism. In general, I think it is fairly easy to prove. IDEA: Suppose you have a (n,k) horn in Dec K so a sequence of faces with a gap. Map that down to K where you are given a filler for the horn and hence know the gap and what fills things there. The filler is a n+2 simplex in K so gives an n+1 simplex in Dec K. I think that will be the filler up top. There was a moment when I had some doubts about the compatibility with respect to the last face, but in fact you are GIVEN a filler for the horn down the bottom so I don't think now there is a problem. Does that look right?

   It certainly is a Kan fibration if Kis a simplicial group since it is clearly an epimorphism.

   In general, I think it is fairly easy to prove. IDEA: Suppose you have a (n,k) horn in Dec K so a sequence of faces with a gap. Map that down to K where you are given a filler for the horn and hence know the gap and what fills things there. The filler is a n+2 simplex in K so gives an n+1 simplex in Dec K. I think that will be the filler up top. There was a moment when I had some doubts about the compatibility with respect to the last face, but in fact you are GIVEN a filler for the horn down the bottom so I don't think now there is a problem.

   Does that look right?

3. • CommentRowNumber3.
   • CommentAuthorHarry Gindi
   • CommentTimeMar 27th 2010
   • PermaLink
   Author: Harry Gindi
   Format: MarkdownYou should add the link to PJ Ehlers's thesis here as well, which discusses all of this in detail (and has become pretty much my standard source for all of this simplicial homotopy theory ) stuff.

   You should add the link to PJ Ehlers's thesis here as well, which discusses all of this in detail (and has become pretty much my standard source for all of this simplicial homotopy theory ) stuff.

4. • CommentRowNumber4.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeMar 29th 2010
   • (edited Apr 26th 2012)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownIt should be true that when <latex> X_0 = * </latex> that the decalage <latex> \mathrm{Dec} X </latex> of <latex> X </latex> is the pullback along <latex> X^{\Delta^1} \stackrel{d_1}{\to} X </latex> of <latex> \Delta^0 \to X </latex>. Do we have a discussion of this in the literature anywhere? [ edit: this is of course not true: the decalage gives a smaller model for $X^I \times_X X_0$ ]

   It should be true that when that the decalage of is the pullback along of . Do we have a discussion of this in the literature anywhere?

   [ edit: this is of course not true: the decalage gives a smaller model for $X^I \times_X X_0$ ]

5. • CommentRowNumber5.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeMar 29th 2010
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownI added a query box to [[decalage]] on this point

   I added a query box to decalage on this point

6. • CommentRowNumber6.
   • CommentAuthorHarry Gindi
   • CommentTimeMar 29th 2010
   • (edited Mar 30th 2010)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Harry Gindi
   Format: MarkdownEdit: @Urs: Yes, you actually can describe it that way. In Ehlers's thesis, he defines the internal hom in terms of the Décalage, because the latter is easier to describe explicitly.

   Edit:

   @Urs: Yes, you actually can describe it that way. In Ehlers's thesis, he defines the internal hom in terms of the Décalage, because the latter is easier to describe explicitly.

7. • CommentRowNumber7.
   • CommentAuthorTim_Porter
   • CommentTimeMar 30th 2010
   • PermaLink
   Author: Tim_Porter
   Format: Markdownbeware, which 'internal hom'. The join is the tensor ofor an internal hom on augmented sSet, but this is not thee same as the usual internal hom, so 'an internal hom' would be safer wording.

   beware, which 'internal hom'. The join is the tensor ofor an internal hom on augmented sSet, but this is not thee same as the usual internal hom, so 'an internal hom' would be safer wording.

8. • CommentRowNumber8.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeMar 30th 2010
   • (edited Apr 26th 2012)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: Markdown[ old stupid remark removed ]

   [ old stupid remark removed ]

9. • CommentRowNumber9.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeJul 3rd 2021
   • (edited Jul 3rd 2021)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexI moved the example of simplicial classifying spaces from the last paragraph of the Idea-section to a first subsection of the Examples-section (now [here](https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/decalage#ExampleForSimplicialClassifyingSpaces)). Incidentally, it used to say (and still says): > A central application is the special case where $X = \overline{W} G$ is the [[simplicial classifying space]] of a [[simplicial group]] $G$ (see at _[[simplicial principal bundle]]_). In this case $Dec_0 \overline{W} G$, called $W G$, is a standard model for the _[universal simplicial principal bundle](simplicial%20principal%20bundle#UniversalSimplicialBundle)_. But that seems wrong to me, if we stick to standard conventions. I have added this followup remark: > Or rather, with the conventions used at *[[simplicial classifying spaces]]* (which are those of [Goerss & Jardine, p. 269](https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/simplicial+classifying+space#GoerssJardine09)) we have $W G \,=\, Dec^0(\overline{W}G)$ (shifting and forgetting the *first*, i.e. 0th, face-and degeneracy maps.) <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/decalage/39">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/decalage/39">v39</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/decalage">current</a>

   I moved the example of simplicial classifying spaces from the last paragraph of the Idea-section to a first subsection of the Examples-section (now here).

   Incidentally, it used to say (and still says):

   A central application is the special case where $X = \overline{W} G$ is the simplicial classifying space of a simplicial group $G$ (see at simplicial principal bundle). In this case $Dec_0 \overline{W} G$, called $W G$, is a standard model for the universal simplicial principal bundle.

   But that seems wrong to me, if we stick to standard conventions. I have added this followup remark:

   Or rather, with the conventions used at simplicial classifying spaces (which are those of Goerss & Jardine, p. 269) we have $W G \,=\, Dec^0(\overline{W}G)$ (shifting and forgetting the first, i.e. 0th, face-and degeneracy maps.)

   diff, v39, current

10. • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJul 3rd 2021
    • (edited Jul 3rd 2021)
    • PermaLink
    Author: Urs
    Format: MarkdownItexIt feels like there ought to be a slick way to use décalage to produce a simplicial model for the relation $\big[ \mathbf{B}\mathbb{Z}, \mathbf{B}\mathcal{G} \big] \;\simeq\; \mathcal{G} \!\sslash_{\!\!ad}\! \mathcal{G}$, for any $\infty$-group (simplicial group) $\mathcal{G}$. But if so, I don't see it yet. Does anyone know?

    It feels like there ought to be a slick way to use décalage to produce a simplicial model for the relation $\big[ \mathbf{B}\mathbb{Z}, \mathbf{B}\mathcal{G} \big] \;\simeq\; \mathcal{G} \!\sslash_{\!\!ad}\! \mathcal{G}$, for any $\infty$-group (simplicial group) $\mathcal{G}$. But if so, I don’t see it yet. Does anyone know?

11. • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthornasosev
    • CommentTimeApr 4th 2022
    • PermaLink
    Author: nasosev
    Format: MarkdownItexThere appears to be a typo in the section 'Morphisms out of the décalage' in the line starting with 'the vertical morphism is given in degree $0$ by...': $s_0$ should be replaced by $d_0$.

    There appears to be a typo in the section ’Morphisms out of the décalage’ in the line starting with ’the vertical morphism is given in degree $0$ by…’: $s_0$ should be replaced by $d_0$.