5
$\begingroup$

I have been studying TQFTs and I am mainly reading

However, neither of them are completely rigorous. As Lurie mentions on his homepage, his paper is an exposition. Has this proof been completely rigorously done anywhere? Also, I was very much enjoying Walker's notes, but they aren't complete. Are there any references that introduce TQFTs and explain how the definition of Extended TQFTs as $\left(\infty,n\right)$-functors comes up?

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
4
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ "Has this proof been completely rigourously done anywhere?": No, definitely not. Calaque and Scheimbauer in their paper do give a rigorous definition of the symmetric monoidal (∞,n)-category of bordisms. But there is nothing beyond. $\endgroup$
    – Dmitri Pavlov
    Commented Jan 31, 2020 at 2:36
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Ayala-Francis write the proof assuming a result on factorization homology: arxiv.org/abs/1705.02240 $\endgroup$
    – ThiKu
    Commented Jan 31, 2020 at 6:18
  • $\begingroup$ @ThiKu, I found it quite hard to read the Ayala-Francis paper. What do I need to read before it? I.e., What are the prereqs? $\endgroup$
    – Chetan Vuppulury
    Commented Jan 31, 2020 at 7:29
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I have no idea. I just wanted to hint you to that paper, which seems to be the state of the art. $\endgroup$
    – ThiKu
    Commented Jan 31, 2020 at 10:32

0

Reset to default

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .