I am giving a lecture series in Lisbon on Structure Theory for Higher WZW Terms (schreiber). In the process I am making further little edits in the geometry of physics lecture note series. Today I mostly touched the section on Lie integration at geometry of physics – smooth homotopy types.
]]>Thanks for the alert. I managed to fix this by, it seems, experimenting with removing and re-adding whitespace.
On the one hand this is good, on the other hand it is one more indication that something is bugging the software. We have beein discussing “invisible” whitespace problems also with redirects lately…
]]>There’s a table that doesn’t work after
Structures expressible in cohesive homotopy type theory
I tried to see what was wrong, but couldn’t find it.
]]>am polishing the first sections of geometry of physics ( coordinate systems, smooth sets, differential forms, differentiation, smooth homotopy types)
I will be using this during this November in a lecture series that I am giving at Paris-Diderot to (mostly) the members of the group of Gabriel Catren.
]]>Okay, thanks for the information.
The main cause of smoke may have been in the chapter “Fields”, because when I tried to save that as a separate entry, it just wouldn’t save: no error message, nothing, just a blank window.
While I didn’t have the energy to check, I believe I had mostly built that chapter from the entry field (physics), so I crossed my fingers that I didn’t add much more then (I forget) and simply discarded the whole chapter and replaced it by a pointer to that entry.
But after removing the Fields-chapter (and all the chapters listed above and a few more) the entry geometry of physics would still not save, it would give me that “Internal error” (at least no foul jokes as in the smoke error, which helps with keeping up a high spirit). So I removed also the chapters on TQFT and maybe something else. Then it worked.
Now one should spend an hour or two bringing all this again into a coherent form. Maybe next year.
]]>It displays without smoke for me.
]]>I have now taken out a bunch of chapters from geometry of physics and put them into separate entries. For instance
and a few more.
I still get that smoke error every now and then here and there, but reloading often helps. Please try reloading geometry of physics to see if it displays now.
Of course now all the cross-links involving the sections that I took out are broken, as are all the pointers to the references; the main table of contents is now incoherent (since it doesn’t see the subsections of the chapters taken out anymore) etc., But I don’t have the time now to fix all this.
It’s just too bad that the nLab software cannot handle this.
]]>Yeah, in principle it exists. The page did display until, it seems, the nLab software was updated a while back.
Probably I should try to take the page apart into smaller subpages. I need to see if I can find time for this and how much fiddling it will take.
Or I just wait and pray for the bug to be ironed out.
]]>Does geometry of physics exist? I get only ths:
]]>Application error (Apache)
Something very bad just happened. I just know it. Do you smell smoke?
there is now the beginning of a new chapter:
(for the moment in a separate entry, for ease of editing). So far this mainly consists of a subsection on 2-modules.
]]>Today I gave the second of three lecture sessions at
Workshop on Topological Aspects of Quantum Field Theories
Singapore
(14 - 18 Jan 2013)
on infinity-Chern-Simons theory (schreiber). This second session followed the section
During the talk I noticed of course a few more typos, which I have fixed now. There will be more typos left, and more fine-tuning wouldn’t hurt either. If you point me to anything that bugs you, then I’ll try to react and improve on the text further.
]]>Thanks a whole lot! That's nice.
I have copied the whole chunk back to geometry of physics now. Thanks again.
]]>I corrected a few typos in extended Lagrangian, but haven’t copied these over to geometry of physics.
]]>Today I gave the first of three lecture sessions at
Workshop on Topological Aspects of Quantum Field Theories
Singapore
(14 - 18 Jan 2013)
on infinity-Chern-Simons theory (schreiber). This first session followed the section
During the talk I noticed of course a few more typos, which I have fixed now. There will be more typos left, and more fine-tuning wouldn't hurt either. If you point me to anything that bugs you, thwn I'll try to react and improve on the text further.
]]>I am writing a section to lead in to the Physics-chapter at geometry of physics. It is called
There are currently 7 subsections to that. The first five should be readable, the sixth is still a bit telegraphic and sketchy, the seventh for the time being just some keywords. Will continue to tomorrow.
The same material is currently also at extended Lagrangian. That page has the advantage that it loads orders of magnitude faster than geometry of physics.
]]>There is now a good bit of material in a new section
It’s still a bit rough here and there, but should be a start. Mostly this reproduces the nLab entry field (physics), for the moment.
Hm, turns out I have section headlines of depth 7 now and they are no longer correctly displayed. Need to think about what to do. Is this something one could fix with CSS?
]]>Thanks, Todd! Much appreciated.
I added some more hyperlinks, for instance to Einstein tensor, energy-momentum tensor, Einstein equations and… (in production) field (physics)…
]]>Urs, now that you’re getting back to “Geometry of Physics”, I took the opportunity of incorporating your words in #67 (which I found very helpful) into the Idea section of quantum gravity. I hope you don’t mind. I changed a word here and there just for the sake of the English.
]]>I’m not sure that matters so much about or , but it seems to me that someone coming from a set theoretic background, who has just got the idea that a set theoretic element, , is a map from a singleton to the set (and set element is the first thing they see at element) and then links this to a term , will be confused about the use of a different domain.
]]>I see what you mean. So further below in that “Dictionary” entry is the more general case of terms on context. There the “” is essentially (not quite exactly, actually) what used to be the before. Do you think it would be better to call them both are both ?
]]>Might that confuse a reader to have in ’3. term introduction rule’ that an element of an object is a morphism from any object , whereas just below in ’Dictionary: type theory / category theory’, an element corresponding to a term of is a morphism only from ?
]]>I have kept and keep adding material to geometry of physics, but I have not managed yet to complete a whole new chapter. Rather I ended up adding bits and pieces here and there as I needed them for discussion with students. I thought I’d make a new announcement here only once I have finished a good bit of a new chapter.
But since this state of affairs is not going to change anytime soon, I should just continue to announce the bits and pieces added, anyway.
Today the topic is concretification of smooth groupoids and higher groupoids and how to obtain “moduli stacks of connections on some ” this way:
This is a generalization of the earlier discussion of Smooth moduli spaces of differential forms, where the key is that instead of just using the ordinary image of the dissolving map into the sharp modality to concretify, we need all the n-images of this map, and combine them degreewise.
]]>I don’t see why we would want to remove information that some readers may find useful. You don’t need to scroll through the TOC if you already know where you want to go. But for readers who don’t already know what they want to read it is orders of magnitude more convenient to glance through the TOC then glance through the whole entry!
But I suggest we come back to this later when the entry has been developed more. At the moment this whole discussion is a bit premature with the whole entry having only barely started. Let’s see what it looks like later when it is grown up and then spend time with discussing its optimal formatting.
]]>I understand. I might have preferred to just add the three lines to create a toc rather than roll it back because there were other minor changes to the sidebar that are now lost. No big deal.
To me, the benefits of the toc are not greater than the distraction of needing to scroll through a super long toc, which is now largely redundant with the table of chapters preceeding it, to get to the contents, but maybe it is just me.
What if we
?
It would be even better if we could nest the hiding feature so that the contents of a chapter appear when you hover over the chapter.
]]>