Skip to main content
12 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Apr 13, 2017 at 12:58 history edited CommunityBot
replaced http://mathoverflow.net/ with https://mathoverflow.net/
Aug 28, 2011 at 2:13 vote accept Qiaochu Yuan
Aug 16, 2011 at 15:50 comment added Nicola Ciccoli @both i missed it at first, great. Thanks!
Aug 16, 2011 at 15:41 comment added Qiaochu Yuan @Nicola: yes, see the link in the part after "Edit:" and also the follow-up question at mathoverflow.net/questions/66675/… .
Aug 16, 2011 at 12:24 comment added Theo Johnson-Freyd @Nicola: There has been some discussion of just that here on MO. Anyone remember enough of the titles to find the posts?
Aug 16, 2011 at 8:51 comment added Nicola Ciccoli Just to add a small comment on the categorical side: what happens here is quite common. A group object in the category of groups, for example, is an abelian group. This is exactly due to the fact that inversion is an antihomomorphism. I wonder whether there is a notion of category+involutive functor in which a "group-like" object can be defined clarifying the situation.
Aug 16, 2011 at 6:50 comment added Nicola Ciccoli As for the reference to bicategories, some was done, in the geometric case, by Landsmann, some years ago: arxiv.org/pdf/math-ph/0008003v2
Aug 15, 2011 at 19:59 answer added Theo Johnson-Freyd timeline score: 6
Aug 15, 2011 at 17:49 history edited Qiaochu Yuan CC BY-SA 3.0
added 590 characters in body; deleted 14 characters in body
Aug 15, 2011 at 16:51 answer added Dima Shlyakhtenko timeline score: 7
Aug 15, 2011 at 15:43 comment added Todd Trimble "I read somewhere on MO that the correct definition of a morphism between Poisson manifolds is a Lagrangian submanifold of their product." Does this have something to do with coisotropic calculus?
Aug 15, 2011 at 15:06 history asked Qiaochu Yuan CC BY-SA 3.0