Timeline for Degeneracies for semi-simplicial Kan complexes
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
3 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 4, 2012 at 7:21 | comment | added | Martin | You are right. I interpreted your question 1. as a reference request and didn't see Kan's paper mentioned, so I thought it might be useful to provide that reference. I didn't have the necessary privileges to comment, so I decided to post a slightly expanded comment as an answer. Did you see that Peter May posted a comment to John Klein's answer suggesting section 4.4 of Fritsch and Piccinini? In the bibliography of that book there are some papers of Fritsch (although most of them in German) that seem relevant, especially (1972), but I don't have access to those papers right now. | |
| Dec 4, 2012 at 2:54 | comment | added | Mike Shulman | Thanks! This doesn't seem to me to be any different from Rourke and Sanderson's proof, though; it just has some bits omitted. In addition to their 2.1, he seems to use that a semisimplicial set which satisfies the "extension condition" has the RLP versus inclusions that induce inclusions of strong deformation retracts upon geometric realization, which is what R+S need their simplicial approximation theorem to prove (if "extension condition" means the usual RLP against horns). | |
| Dec 3, 2012 at 2:27 | history | answered | Martin | CC BY-SA 3.0 |