Skip to main content
11 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Dec 19, 2013 at 9:51 answer added André Henriques timeline score: 2
Dec 14, 2013 at 21:46 answer added Patrick I-Z timeline score: 9
Dec 14, 2013 at 9:52 vote accept Bruno Martelli
Dec 13, 2013 at 17:36 answer added Claudio Gorodski timeline score: 10
Dec 13, 2013 at 14:33 answer added André Henriques timeline score: 16
Dec 13, 2013 at 13:11 answer added Qfwfq timeline score: 8
Dec 13, 2013 at 12:34 answer added Tim Porter timeline score: 9
Dec 13, 2013 at 12:24 comment added Bruno Martelli Yes, some kind of equivariant map locally defined on the manifold coverings would be a good idea... I hope someone has already done the tedious exercise :-)
Dec 13, 2013 at 12:03 comment added HJRW One comment. When dealing with graphs of groups (which are highly analogous to orbifolds), it's quite complicated to get the correct definition of morphism. On the other hand, it's easy if you pass to the universal cover, ie the Bass--Serre tree. The correct morphism then is just an equivariant map between trees. Of course, this doesn't help with bad orbifolds, but since all orbifolds are locally good, and the notion of morphism should be locally defined, it should be a very possible (though tedious) exercise to turn this into a precise definition.
Dec 13, 2013 at 12:02 comment added Francois Ziegler Hopefully @PatrickI-Z will comment -- I know that your problem was one of the motivations of this paper (arXiv), whose abstract starts: "We consider orbifolds as diffeological spaces. This gives rise to a natural notion of differentiable maps between orbifolds, making them into a subcategory of diffeology."
Dec 13, 2013 at 11:43 history asked Bruno Martelli CC BY-SA 3.0