Timeline for On combinatorial and cellular model categories and infinity categories
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 29, 2015 at 17:46 | comment | added | David White | Awesome, thanks! I knew that paper, but somehow did not know that result. | |
| Jun 29, 2015 at 11:19 | comment | added | Dylan Wilson | A.5 here: hopf.math.purdue.edu/Dugger/smod.pdf | |
| Jun 29, 2015 at 4:12 | comment | added | David White | Any luck finding that reference from Dugger? Also, I clarified what I was looking for in (2), i.e. something cofibrantly generated but not cellular. Pro categories seem to be a really nice example | |
| Jun 23, 2015 at 20:43 | comment | added | David White | I found a place where the dual came up naturally: mathoverflow.net/questions/117267/… | |
| Jun 20, 2015 at 17:20 | comment | added | Dylan Wilson | And I'll add the reference when I get back- about to board a plane :) | |
| Jun 20, 2015 at 17:19 | comment | added | Dylan Wilson | Pro-categories are examples of opposites of presentable things... Indeed: something is accessible if and only if it is "Ind" on a small category, so pro guys are precisely the opposites of accessible categories. When the small category you started with has finite (co)limits then you get presentable categories and their opposites for Ind and Pro. | |
| Jun 20, 2015 at 16:17 | comment | added | David White | Hi Dylan. Thanks for your answer. Can you give a precise reference for (1)? If I ever learned that result before I must have forgotten it. Regarding (3), I like the pro example. Can you think of a specific instance when the opposite of a presentable $\infty$-category was needed? I can't seem to think of a time anyone needed the opposite of a combinatorial model category. | |
| Jun 20, 2015 at 9:31 | history | answered | Dylan Wilson | CC BY-SA 3.0 |