Timeline for Ambiguous definition of "nerve of an open covering" on wikipedia?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 26, 2010 at 16:27 | vote | accept | Rasmus | ||
| Mar 24, 2010 at 18:07 | comment | added | Rasmus | Tyler: If you'd post this as an answer, I'd accept it. :) | |
| Mar 24, 2010 at 17:58 | comment | added | Tyler Lawson | You obtain the barycentric subdivision of the first definition of nerve. The problem is that these really are two different definitions of nerve. The first definition of nerve produces a simplicial complex (with simplices determined by their vertices), whereas any category-theoretic nerve produces a simplicial set (where each simplex has an orientation). | |
| Mar 24, 2010 at 17:45 | comment | added | Rasmus | But if I refine by adding all intersections of my covering sets, I obtain the baryzentric subdivision of the nerve of the original covering, don't I? | |
| Mar 24, 2010 at 17:42 | history | answered | David Steinberg | CC BY-SA 2.5 |