Timeline for Cobordism categories that don't involve manifolds
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 23, 2014 at 14:30 | comment | added | Charlie Frohman | I am not. I would guess though that you would want your simplicial sets to be at the very least pseudomanifolds, as otherwise the notion of boundary would too loose to be interesting. There must be some notion of cobordism for algebraic sets. | |
| Oct 20, 2014 at 11:00 | comment | added | Manuel Bärenz | Are you aware of any cobordism categories that use (combinatorial) simplicial complexes or simplicial sets? | |
| Mar 29, 2011 at 19:41 | comment | added | Noah Snyder | As far as I know there's no reason not to expect the TQFT for Khovanov Homology to be extended. Nonetheless, working out the fully dualizable objects in some specific 4-category is hard work. (Not to mention figuring out which 4-category you want and proving that it's really a 4-category!) | |
| Mar 27, 2011 at 18:16 | comment | added | Oscar Randal-Williams | @Qiaochu: this is "non-extended" TQFT, which is far more complicated. | |
| Mar 27, 2011 at 16:45 | comment | added | Qiaochu Yuan | Naive question: in what sense is the correspondence for the $3 + 1$ case not settled by Lurie's proof of the cobordism hypothesis? | |
| Mar 27, 2011 at 15:20 | history | edited | Kim Morrison | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 272 characters in body
|
| Mar 27, 2011 at 15:08 | history | edited | Charlie Frohman | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 679 characters in body
|
| Mar 26, 2011 at 23:16 | history | answered | Charlie Frohman | CC BY-SA 2.5 |