Skip to main content
14 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Apr 25, 2014 at 19:12 comment added Qiaochu Yuan When you say "isomorphic" and "an isomorphism" above you mean "quasi-isomorphic" and "a quasi-isomorphism" respectively since you're working with complexes and not their homology.
Apr 23, 2014 at 9:19 comment added Fernando Muro @WlodzimierzHolsztynski I wouldn't say that's the goal of htpy theory, mostly because most algorithms in htpy theory are exponential, hence not useful for explicit computations. This is just my opinion, of course.
Apr 22, 2014 at 22:00 comment added Włodzimierz Holsztyński @Fernando: Right. The goal of the homotopy theory is to obtain algorithms in the important special cases; often it's done, one way or another, via homology.
Apr 22, 2014 at 20:47 comment added Fernando Muro @WlodzimierzHolsztynski Homotopy groups of CW-complexes with no 1-cells can be computed via an algorithm.
Apr 22, 2014 at 13:52 answer added Ronnie Brown timeline score: 6
Apr 22, 2014 at 9:25 answer added D.-C. Cisinski timeline score: 14
Apr 21, 2014 at 16:41 answer added Qiaochu Yuan timeline score: 30
Apr 21, 2014 at 13:37 comment added Eric Wofsey What sort of "nonabelian homology" do you have in mind exactly? Most generalizations of homology that I know of do not come from any sort of complexes.
S Apr 21, 2014 at 12:36 history suggested Michał Kukieła CC BY-SA 3.0
added missing word "equivalence" in "f is a homotopy equivalence"
Apr 21, 2014 at 12:33 review Suggested edits
S Apr 21, 2014 at 12:36
Apr 21, 2014 at 7:17 comment added Włodzimierz Holsztyński Homology is algorithmic while homotopy is not. At least that's the idea.
Apr 21, 2014 at 7:11 comment added Fernando Muro Homology with local coefficient, see Whitehead's theorem.
Apr 21, 2014 at 6:30 comment added Allen Knutson Start here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational_homotopy_theory
Apr 21, 2014 at 6:14 history asked geodude CC BY-SA 3.0