Timeline for Why should have Peter May worked with CGWH instead of CGH in "The Geometry of Iterated Loop Space"?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 8, 2023 at 0:38 | comment | added | saolof | Stupid question: how does the formalism prevent you from building the bug-eyed line while staying in CGWH? I assume this is what the closed space inclusion requirement is for? | |
| Nov 30, 2022 at 9:23 | comment | added | FShrike | CGWH should have all pushouts, not just those with one leg a subspace inclusion, according to an exposition by Strickland. MacLane also claims CGHaus is cocomplete, in CWM, which is seemingly at odds with what you say here. | |
| Jun 6, 2022 at 9:12 | history | edited | David White | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
CHG would be "compact hausdorff generated" instead of "compactly-generated hausdorff" - this is a case where the letter order matters
|
| Jun 5, 2019 at 15:52 | comment | added | nrkm | Can I ask for a simple counterexample of bad pushouts in CG Hausdorff category? | |
| Apr 30, 2015 at 21:13 | vote | accept | archipelago | ||
| Apr 29, 2015 at 13:48 | comment | added | Clément de Seguins Pazzis | As far as geometric realizations of simplicial spaces are concerned, it turns that they are well-behaved with respect to the CGH property: see my article sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166864113002356. Yet, the concern over pushouts remains valid. | |
| Apr 29, 2015 at 13:37 | comment | added | Gerry Myerson | I reckon this is the definitive answer. | |
| Apr 29, 2015 at 1:28 | history | answered | Peter May | CC BY-SA 3.0 |