15
$\begingroup$

In Higher Topos Theory, Lurie argues that the coherence diagrams for fully weak $n$-categories with $n>2$ are 'so complicated as to be essentially unusable', before mentioning that several dramatic simplifications occur if we step up to $\infty$-categories but require all higher morphisms to be invertible.

What are some examples in nature (topological quantum field theory, string theory etc.) of notions that are best understood as a weak $(\infty,n)$-category, or simply a weak $n$-category, for 'large' $n$? (something which is naturally a 'fully weak' $\infty$-category would be interesting too)

Bordisms between $n$-dimensional manifolds have the former structure naturally and serve as the canonical example coming from TQFTs; are there any others?

(I believe the present question differs from this one, although the answers may overlap, as I'm looking for examples of $\infty$-categories that are 'motivated by nature' in the above sense and already believe higher categories are useful.)

I am also interested in natural occurrences of $\infty$-categories or weak $n$-categories for 'large' $n$ in areas of mathematics outside of category theory, so please share any good ones that occur to you. The use of $2$-category theory for the Galois theorem of Borceux and Janelidze wouldn't quite qualify, but if there is any area outside of category theory that seriously uses weak $3$-categories I would be interested to hear about it (invariants of $3$-manifolds?). This is why 'large' is in quotations; examples with $n>>1$ would be great, but I consider $3$ 'large' in certain contexts where $2$ isn't.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I think this qualifies as a 'big list' question and should be CW accordingly, if someone could be so kind as to change it. $\endgroup$ – Alec Rhea Jul 6 at 5:14
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I have notified mods so they can change it. $\endgroup$ – David Roberts Jul 6 at 9:00
  • $\begingroup$ @DavidRoberts Much appreciated. $\endgroup$ – Alec Rhea Jul 6 at 9:03
9
$\begingroup$

$\newcommand{\Vect}{\mathrm{Vect}} \newcommand{\Mod}{\mathrm{Mod}} \newcommand{\cc}{\mathbf{C}}$Here are three (related) examples. The first one is simple (although not really related to physics): an $\mathbf{E}_n$-space is "just" an $(\infty,n)$-category with one object, one $1$-morphism, ..., and one $(n-1)$-morphism. This can be generalized: an $\mathbf{E}_k$-monoidal $(\infty,n)$-category can be thought of as an $(\infty,n+k)$-category with one object, ..., and one $(k-1)$-morphism.

For the second example (whose details I don't know), let $\Vect(\cc)$ denote the category of vector spaces, regarded as an $(\infty,1)$-category by taking its nerve. This admits a symmetric monoidal structure, and one can look at the $(\infty,2)$-category $\mathrm{Mod}_{\Vect(\cc)}$ of modules over it, taken in presentable $(\infty,1)$-categories. (This is related to the category of $\cc$-algebras, bimodules, and intertwiners.) This is again supposed to be a symmetric monoidal $(\infty,2)$-category, so one can look at "modules" over it to get an $(\infty,3)$-category, and so on. I think that the $(\infty,n)$-category you get this way is supposed to be the natural target of "physical" $n$-dimensional extended TQFTs, and that its Picard space is supposed/conjectured to be $\Omega^\infty \Sigma^{n+1} I_{\cc^\times}$, where $I_{\cc^\times}$ is the Brown-Comenetz dualizing spectrum (although I'm not sure of these statements, and would appreciate if someone confirmed/elaborated upon them!).

For the third example, let $\mathcal{C}$ denote a symmetric monoidal $(\infty,1)$-category; then you can inductively construct an $(\infty,n+1)$-category $\mathrm{Mor}_n(\mathcal{C})$ (the "higher Morita category") for any $n$ by defining its objects to be $\mathbf{E}_n$-algebras in $\mathcal{C}$, and such that the $(\infty,n)$-category of morphisms from $R$ and $S$ is the category $\mathrm{Mor}_{n-1}(_R\mathrm{BMod}_S)$, where $_R\mathrm{BMod}_S$ is the $(\infty,1)$-category of $(A,B)$-bimodules. If $n=1$, this is the category of associative algebras (in $\mathcal{C}$), bimodules, and bimodule homomorphisms (so the equivalences are Morita equivalences). You then get a TQFT $Z_A:\mathrm{Bord}_{n+1}\to \mathrm{Mor}_n(\mathcal{C})$ for every $\mathbf{E}_n$-algebra object $A$ of $\mathcal{C}$ which is fully dualizable in $\mathrm{Mor}_n(\mathcal{C})$ (this is a rather strong condition); this TQFT sends $M^d$ to the factorization/topological chiral homology $\int_{\mathbf{R}^{n-d}\times M^d} A$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Interesting, thanks for the reply -- where do $E_n$-spaces come up in mathematical practice? Are you talking about these guys? ncatlab.org/nlab/show/En-algebra $\endgroup$ – Alec Rhea Jul 6 at 9:05
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @AlecRhea Technically yes, although that page does not mentions explicitly the examples of $E_n$-algebras in spaces, as far as I can tell. They are rather important: a group-like $E_n$-space is exactly a $n$-fold loop space, and $E_n$-structures on parameter spaces tend to produce interesting multiplicative structures on invariants (e.g. the Thom spectrum of an $E_n$-map is an $E_n$-ring spectrum). $\endgroup$ – Denis Nardin Jul 6 at 10:25
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I also don't know about this stuff, but I thought the state of affairs was that we'd like to find a naturally occurring target with Picard space a shift of the Anderson dual of the sphere but that iterating "Mod" on $\mathbb{C}$ is definitely the wrong answer. For example, right away at level 2 you'll want super vector spaces to see that $\mathbb{Z}/2$ in $\pi_1S^0$. The next category is supposed to be the "Brauer-Wall category of super, simple algebras", and I don't think the next natural "delooped" category is known. Maybe the conformal net people have a guess about it? $\endgroup$ – Dylan Wilson Jul 6 at 18:03
  • $\begingroup$ Ah, yep. Thanks. $\endgroup$ – skd Jul 6 at 20:42
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @skd It seems misleading to call $\mathrm{Mor}_1(\mathcal C)$ the "category of associative algebras and Morita equivalences." It's the $(\infty,2)$-category of associative algebras, bimodules, and bimodule homomorphisms, in which it happens to be the case that the equivalences coincide with the Morita equivalences. $\endgroup$ – Kevin Carlson Jul 7 at 19:09

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.