bio | website | math.uchicago.edu/~may |
---|---|---|
location | US | |
age | 75 | |
visits | member for | 4 years, 3 months |
seen | Mar 24 at 22:50 | |
stats | profile views | 6,623 |
At the University of Chicago since 1967.
Mainly known as an algebraic topologist.
Mar 17 |
comment |
How much of homotopy theory can be done using only finite topological spaces?
Whoops. Thanks Lennart. I didn't know Raptis's paper and I think it is the same model structure. So here is something new. For a discrete group G, the category of G-posets has a model structure Quillen equivalent to the standard model structure on G-spaces or G-simplicial sets. |
Feb 1 |
comment |
How much of homotopy theory can be done using only finite topological spaces?
Since I wrote that answer, Inna Zakharevich and I have defined a model structure on the category of posets and proved that it is Quillen equivalent to the standard model structure on spaces or simplicial sets. Thus in principle one can do all of algebraic topology with posets. |
Jan 4 |
awarded | Enlightened |
Jan 4 |
awarded | Guru |
Dec 6 |
answered | $E_n$-space and n-connected pointed space |
Dec 4 |
awarded | Yearling |
Nov 25 |
answered | Is an A-infinity thing the same the same as strict thing viewed through a homotopy equivalence? |
Nov 8 |
comment |
Why higher category theory?
Lennart, Not the place for a debate (think of the poor guy who asked the question), but see Remark 3.2.2 in that paper: if I'm reading it right, it tells you how to do that. See you in February. |
Nov 6 |
awarded | Good Answer |
Nov 3 |
revised |
Why higher category theory?
deleted 5 characters in body |
Nov 3 |
comment |
Why higher category theory?
David, I apologize: I misstated the title (now corrected). It is Towards Higher Categories. Volume 152 of The IMA Volumes in Mathematics and its Applications, published by Springer. It is edited by John Baez and myself. |
Nov 3 |
comment |
Why higher category theory?
Agreed, but if I understand the details (and I may not) it didn't have to: authors may very well like the language and prefer to use it whether or not it is actually necessary. Sometimes it may be convenient and may shorten things, other times it may be essential, but other times it may not really be helping. Certainly there are other recent papers I could name where it is not really helping and where sharper point-set level results can be obtained with no more work. |
Nov 3 |
comment |
Why higher category theory?
Well, you are clearly not looking at serious computations :) |
Nov 3 |
awarded | Nice Answer |
Nov 3 |
revised |
Is there an analog of the Barratt-Eccles construction for group-like E_∞-spaces and E_∞-ring spaces?
added 9 characters in body |
Nov 2 |
revised |
$E_{\infty}$ spaces are $A_{\infty}$ spaces
added 225 characters in body |
Nov 2 |
revised |
Why higher category theory?
added 174 characters in body |
Nov 2 |
answered | Why higher category theory? |
Nov 2 |
answered | $E_{\infty}$ spaces are $A_{\infty}$ spaces |
Oct 6 |
comment |
Classifying space for fibrations with Eilenberg-MacLane space as fibers
Qiaochu, bundles in fact, not just fibrations, since K(A,n+1) is the classifying space of the topological abelian group K(A,n). (See e.g. my Classifying Spaces and Fibrations.) |