bio | website | |
---|---|---|
location | Münster, Germany | |
age | 27 | |
visits | member for | 5 years, 6 months |
seen | 2 days ago | |
stats | profile views | 37,745 |
I am interested in the interactions between algebraic geometry and category theory. More specifically, I "model" algebraic geometry on cocomplete symmetric monoidal categories.
Here is a link to my PhD thesis. Comments are welcome.
Email: [my last name] [at] uni-muenster.de
Jun 13 |
awarded | Nice Question |
May 26 |
comment |
Simple examples for the use of spectral sequences
I wish I could do these calculations in my head! |
May 24 |
awarded | Favorite Question |
May 17 |
awarded | Popular Question |
May 14 |
awarded | Good Answer |
May 6 |
asked | Kan extensions in the $2$-category of monoidal categories |
May 2 |
awarded | Popular Question |
Apr 30 |
revised |
Should the formula for the inverse of a 2x2 matrix be obvious?
deleted 10 characters in body |
Apr 30 |
accepted | Exact sequences of pointed sets - two definitions |
Apr 30 |
revised |
Exact sequences of pointed sets - two definitions
added 70 characters in body |
Apr 29 |
awarded | Popular Question |
Apr 28 |
asked | Exact sequences of pointed sets - two definitions |
Apr 23 |
comment |
Awfully sophisticated proof for simple facts
@Vectornaut: Why? |
Apr 20 |
comment |
How would set theory research be affected by using ETCS instead of ZFC?
Couldn't we just say that the notions of transitive sets and well-founded relations are more or less restricted to "material set theories" (as defined at the nlab)? And then ETCS and SEAR, as structural set theories, will have some problems with these notions. Still, structural set theories seem to capture what's going on in all fields of mathematics except for what is called "set theory", but which is really "material set theory". Right? |
Apr 20 |
comment |
How would set theory research be affected by using ETCS instead of ZFC?
@Todd Trimble: Has SEAR been published in a journal or a book? |
Apr 18 |
comment |
(co)limits in the category of diffeological spaces vs. category of smooth manifolds
@user59001: Why do you post this on mathoverflow after having received an answer on math.stackexchange? Could you please at least leave a comment there? |
Apr 16 |
awarded | Popular Question |
Apr 14 |
comment |
Sexy vacuity …
Oups, I meant continuous functions into discrete spaces, aka locally constant functions. |
Apr 8 |
comment |
Do hom-sets really live in the category Set?
I just wanted to remark that I've posted an answer on the math.SE version of this question. |
Mar 30 |
comment |
Why is a topology made up of 'open' sets?
"the category of topological spaces is equivalent to the category of relational algebras for the ultrafilter monad." -- they are isomorphic, I guess. |