Skip to main content
added 1 character in body
Source Link
David White
  • 30.3k
  • 9
  • 154
  • 250

In the Higher Topos Theory, Example 1.2.14.2 says “finitely presentable $\infty$-groupoids correspond precisely to the finite cell complexes” But, for example, $K(\mathbb{Z}, 2)$ is seems finitely presentable ($1$ object $*$, $0$ generating $1$-morphisms and $1$ generating $2$-morphism on $\mathrm{id}_*$) and it is not homotopy equivalent to a finite complex. Is this a mistake in the book?

UPD. Judging by this entry, my presentation is still described by $S^2$, and not by $K(\mathbb{Z}, 2)$. Then my question is: where can I read the formal definition of the presentation of $\infty$-categories by generators and relations (and in particular, understand in these terms where higher morphisms arise from here). I don't see any details from LuriLurie yet.

In the Higher Topos Theory, Example 1.2.14.2 says “finitely presentable $\infty$-groupoids correspond precisely to the finite cell complexes” But, for example, $K(\mathbb{Z}, 2)$ is seems finitely presentable ($1$ object $*$, $0$ generating $1$-morphisms and $1$ generating $2$-morphism on $\mathrm{id}_*$) and it is not homotopy equivalent to a finite complex. Is this a mistake in the book?

UPD. Judging by this entry, my presentation is still described by $S^2$, and not by $K(\mathbb{Z}, 2)$. Then my question is: where can I read the formal definition of the presentation of $\infty$-categories by generators and relations (and in particular, understand in these terms where higher morphisms arise from here). I don't see any details from Luri yet.

In the Higher Topos Theory, Example 1.2.14.2 says “finitely presentable $\infty$-groupoids correspond precisely to the finite cell complexes” But, for example, $K(\mathbb{Z}, 2)$ is seems finitely presentable ($1$ object $*$, $0$ generating $1$-morphisms and $1$ generating $2$-morphism on $\mathrm{id}_*$) and it is not homotopy equivalent to a finite complex. Is this a mistake in the book?

UPD. Judging by this entry, my presentation is still described by $S^2$, and not by $K(\mathbb{Z}, 2)$. Then my question is: where can I read the formal definition of the presentation of $\infty$-categories by generators and relations (and in particular, understand in these terms where higher morphisms arise from here). I don't see any details from Lurie yet.

Post Undeleted by Arshak Aivazian
Post Deleted by Arshak Aivazian
added 364 characters in body
Source Link

In the Higher Topos Theory, Example 1.2.14.2 says “finitely presentable $\infty$-groupoids correspond precisely to the finite cell complexes” But, for example, $K(\mathbb{Z}, 2)$ is seems finitely presentable ($1$ object $*$, $0$ generating $1$-morphisms and $1$ generating $2$-morphism on $\mathrm{id}_*$) and it is not homotopy equivalent to a finite complex. Is this a mistake in the book?

UPD. Judging by this entry, my presentation is still described by $S^2$, and not by $K(\mathbb{Z}, 2)$. Then my question is: where can I read the formal definition of the presentation of $\infty$-categories by generators and relations (and in particular, understand in these terms where higher morphisms arise from here). I don't see any details from Luri yet.

In the Higher Topos Theory, Example 1.2.14.2 says “finitely presentable $\infty$-groupoids correspond precisely to the finite cell complexes” But, for example, $K(\mathbb{Z}, 2)$ is seems finitely presentable ($1$ object $*$, $0$ generating $1$-morphisms and $1$ generating $2$-morphism on $\mathrm{id}_*$) and it is not homotopy equivalent to a finite complex. Is this a mistake in the book?

In the Higher Topos Theory, Example 1.2.14.2 says “finitely presentable $\infty$-groupoids correspond precisely to the finite cell complexes” But, for example, $K(\mathbb{Z}, 2)$ is seems finitely presentable ($1$ object $*$, $0$ generating $1$-morphisms and $1$ generating $2$-morphism on $\mathrm{id}_*$) and it is not homotopy equivalent to a finite complex. Is this a mistake in the book?

UPD. Judging by this entry, my presentation is still described by $S^2$, and not by $K(\mathbb{Z}, 2)$. Then my question is: where can I read the formal definition of the presentation of $\infty$-categories by generators and relations (and in particular, understand in these terms where higher morphisms arise from here). I don't see any details from Luri yet.

Source Link

Do finitely presentable $\infty$-groupoids precisely correspond to the finite cell complexes?

In the Higher Topos Theory, Example 1.2.14.2 says “finitely presentable $\infty$-groupoids correspond precisely to the finite cell complexes” But, for example, $K(\mathbb{Z}, 2)$ is seems finitely presentable ($1$ object $*$, $0$ generating $1$-morphisms and $1$ generating $2$-morphism on $\mathrm{id}_*$) and it is not homotopy equivalent to a finite complex. Is this a mistake in the book?