Timeline for What tools cannot work for orbifolds?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 11, 2016 at 13:39 | comment | added | André Henriques | Concerning "it is quite unfortunate that there does not seem to be a definition of a stack that does not appeal to the functor-of-points-philosophy", you might want to have a look at arxiv.org/pdf/math/0112006v1.pdf. In this little note of mine, I defined an orbifold as a continuous map $E\to X$ whose fibers are $K(\pi,1)$'s. Here, $E$ is the homotopy type of the orbifold, and $X$ is the coarse moduli space of the orbifold. | |
| Jul 12, 2013 at 7:54 | comment | added | Johannes Ebert | No, I don't think so. | |
| Jul 11, 2013 at 23:39 | comment | added | Chris Gerig | My understanding of (higher) category theory and stacks is absent. But viewing the Pontrjagin-Thom construction in terms of $[M,S^n]$ and cobordism classes of framed submanifolds, is there no analog at this level either? | |
| Jul 10, 2013 at 18:47 | history | answered | Johannes Ebert | CC BY-SA 3.0 |