Timeline for A-infinity tensor categories
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 7, 2011 at 7:02 | comment | added | Harry Gindi | Dear Kevin, I guess I'll have to read your paper then! You've got me hooked, so to speak. | |
| Jan 7, 2011 at 6:06 | comment | added | Kevin Walker | @Harry - Perhaps the result of using simplices instead balls would be something like the $\Theta_n$ style $n$-category definitions of Rezk and others. I'm not really an expert on that, so I'm not sure. From our point of view, simplicial (or globular) approaches are not attractive since we want a convenient way to talk about a strong version of duality: for every way of rotating a $k$-ball, there should be a corresponding operation ("duality") on $k$-morphisms. | |
| Jan 7, 2011 at 5:14 | comment | added | Harry Gindi | @Kevin: I think so, sure. If that doesn't work, maybe replace "$\Delta[n]$" by "$Ex^\infty(\Delta[n])$"? | |
| Jan 7, 2011 at 4:41 | comment | added | Kevin Walker | @Harry - Do you mean replace the topological $n$-balls which play a prominent role in our definition with simplices, or with some other simplicial version of balls? | |
| Jan 7, 2011 at 4:28 | comment | added | Harry Gindi | Dear Kevin, can your formalism be adapted to simplicial sets from topological spaces? | |
| Jan 7, 2011 at 2:40 | history | answered | Kevin Walker | CC BY-SA 2.5 |