Timeline for Categorifying the definition of a principal $G$ bundle
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 15, 2023 at 9:28 | vote | accept | Spai | ||
| Apr 14, 2023 at 14:14 | comment | added | Konrad Waldorf | Maybe it is helpful to remark that - under the equivalence with bundle gerbes - anafunctor-morphisms correspond to so-called "stable" morphisms. But stable morphisms are the true morphisms in the bicategory of bundle gerbes. | |
| Apr 14, 2023 at 14:07 | comment | added | Konrad Waldorf | I don't think so. 2-bundles related by invertible anafunctors have to be isomorphic, since they represent the same class in cohomology. Anafunctors are the correct notion of morphisms in the bicategory of Lie groupoids - it is simply natural that they appear here. | |
| Apr 13, 2023 at 13:56 | comment | added | Spai | Thank you! Indeed the definition in your article is most intuitive to me. I saw anafunctors in most definitions and wanted a "non-Morita style" bicategory of principal 2 bundles. In Definition 6.1.5, the morphisms are in terms of anafunctors. Is there a way to avoid them? | |
| Apr 13, 2023 at 9:04 | history | answered | Konrad Waldorf | CC BY-SA 4.0 |