Also made clear in the case of frames, that already by definition a frame is locally compact if it continuous.

]]>Added example that the lattice of open subsets of a topological space is a continuous lattice if and only if the sobrification of the topological space is locally compact (i.e. the topology has a basis of compact neighborhoods).

I am going to add this information at a few other places (where it is relevant)

]]>added pointer to

- John Iliopoulos,
*The making of the standard theory*, Adv.Ser.Direct.High Energy Phys. 26 (2016) 29-59 (spire:1497884, pdf)

added pointer to

- David Corfield,
*Duality as a category-theoretic concept*, Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics Volume 59, August 2017, Pages 55-61 (doi:10.1016/j.shpsb.2015.07.004)

(we had it at *duality*, but not here)

Oh, I see, sorry, good point. We haven’t sent back the galley proofs yet. I think. I’ll add in the citation now.

]]>Is there a model category of symmetric monoidal categories? If I took the cofibrant replacement of a *commutative* monoidal category (a commutative monoid object in $Cat$), would I get something with a nontrivial braiding?

I enjoyed the introductory chapter.

Section 3.2 might have earned me a second non-self citation for

- Duality as a category-theoretic concept, Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, Volume 59, August 2017, Pages 55-61, article.

But no. All I have so far is in A Schema for Duality, Illustrated by Bosonization:

]]>pure mathematicians sometimes work with uninterpreted theories; and duality is a grand theme in mathematics, just as it is in physics. But although comparing duality in mathematics and in physics would be a very worthwhile project, we set it aside. Cf. Corfield (2017)

I added the actegory definition of a tangent category. To simplify the construction, I restricted to the case where tangent categories have negatives.

]]>I don’t understand that the term $G_W^2$ in (3.7) of arXiv:1310.2250 should be there.

I understand that in non-rational cohomology there is an extra torsion contribution on top of $L$, and that’s discussed in section 4 of arXiv:1110.4639. But in rational cohomology there should just remain the $L$-term in that (3.7), and then, it seems to me, there is lacking a condition/reason for the term with $G_W^2$ to vanish in rational cohomology.

]]>while I was at it, I expanded the list of references (here), including items for all the textbooks that have their own nLab entries. Should have done this ages ago.

]]>did some minor edits in the item on supersymmetry. Then I added pointers to our Durham reviews to the item on nPOV in string theory (here)

]]>added some more words to the section *Coset space structure*

Thanks!

]]>I only now realize that my reply to the above got sent to the wrong thread (here), where I said:

Thanks! Have added these here

]]>So I guess that last one is $Sp(2)/SU(2)$, which is pleasing.

]]>Thanks! Have added these here

[this was in reply to the message here, in another thread]

]]>John Baez wrote a post years ago about 4 different ways to build the 7-sphere as a homogeneous space, including

$Spin(6)/SU(3)$

$Spin(5)/SU(2)$

added pointer to today’s preprints:

Jason Aebischer, Wolfgang Altmannshofer, Diego Guadagnoli, Meril Reboud, Peter Stangl, David M. Straub,

*B-decay discrepancies after Moriond 2019*(arXiv:1903.10434)Alakabha Datta, Jacky Kumar, David London,

*The $B$ Anomalies and New Physics in $b \to s e^+ e^-$*(arXiv:1903.10086)Ashutosh Kumar Alok, Dinesh Kumar, Suman Kumbhakar, S Uma Sankar,

*Impact of $D^\ast$ polarization measurement on solutions to $R_D - R_{D^\ast}$ anomalies*(arXiv:1903.10486)

Yeah, and now here is somebody hinting that they have upcoming refined lattice QCD computations which will make the flavour anomalies disappear (here).

]]>Oh, I see. Thanks.

]]>highlighted another subtlety in the computation of the M5 anomaly cancellation, and added further pointers to the literature (same edits also at I8)

]]>The category of sketches has a well behaved symmetric monoidal structure that can be useful when discussing models of theories inside of models of theories, such as double categories or vector bundle groupoids. I thought it might be useful to have on the nlab page for sketches.

Ben MacAdam

]]>Putting the link back.

]]>Re #4: I meant that Michael Freedman is the same person but not Michael Friedman (I corrected the typo in #3).

I have some idea what is behind the issues. I am working on something which should help address it, but it takes time. :-)

]]>