DOCSLIB.ORG

Homotopical Algebra

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Homotopical Algebra Homotopical Algebra Yuri Berest, Sasha Patotski Fall 2015 These are lecture notes of a graduate course MATH 7400 currently taught by Yuri Berest at Cornell University. The notes are taken by Sasha Patotski; the updates will appear every week. If you are reading the notes, please send us corrections; your questions and comments are also very much welcome. Emails: [email protected] and [email protected]. ii Contents 1 Simplicial sets 1 1 Basics of Simplicial sets . .1 1.1 Definitions . .1 1.2 Motivation . .3 1.3 Examples of (co-)simplicial sets . .5 1.4 Remarks on basepoints and reduced simplicial sets . .7 1.5 The nerve of a category . .7 1.6 Examples of nerves . .9 1.7 One example: the nerve of a groupoid . 10 2 Geometric realization . 12 2.1 General remarks on spaces . 12 2.2 Definition of geometric realization . 13 2.3 Two generalizations of geometric realization . 15 2.4 Kan extensions . 17 2.5 Comma categories . 19 2.6 Kan extensions using comma categories . 21 3 Homotopy theory of categories . 23 3.1 The classifying space of a small category . 23 3.2 Homotopy-theoretic properties of the classifying spaces . 25 3.3 Connected components . 27 3.4 Coverings of categories . 28 3.5 Explicit presentations of fundamental groups of categories . 29 3.6 Homology of small categories . 30 3.7 Quillen's Theorem A . 33 3.8 Fibred and cofibred functors . 36 3.9 Quillen's Theorem B . 38 A Topological and geometric background 41 1 Connections on principal bundles . 41 2 Coverings of spaces . 43 3 Homotopy fibration sequences and homotopy fibers . 46 iii iv Chapter 1 Simplicial sets 1 Basics of Simplicial sets 1.1 Definitions Definition 1.1.1. The simplicial category ∆ is a category having finite totally ordered sets [n] := f0; 1; : : : ; ng, n 2 N as objects, and order-preserving functions f : [n] ! [m] as morphisms (i.e. functions f such that i 6 j ) f(i) 6 f(j)). Definition 1.1.2. A simplicial set is a contravariant functor from ∆ to the category of sets Sets. Morphism of simplicial sets is just a natural transformation of functors. Notation 1.1.3. We denote the category Fun(∆op; Sets) of simplicial sets by sSets. Definition 1.1.4. Dually, we define cosimplicial sets as covariant functors ∆ ! Sets. We denote the category of cosimplicial sets by csSets. There are two distinguished classes of maps in ∆: i d :[n − 1] ,! [n] n > 1; 0 6 i 6 n j s :[n + 1] [n] n > 0; 0 6 j 6 n called the face maps and degeneracy maps respectively. Informally, di skips value i in its image and sj repeats the value j twice. More precisely, they are defined by ( ( k if k < i k if k j di(k) = sj(k) = 6 k + 1 if k > i k − 1 if k > j Theorem 1.1.5. Every morphism f 2 Hom∆ ([n]; [m]) can be decomposed in a unique way as f = di1 di2 ··· dir sj1 ··· sjs such that m = n − s + r and i1 < ··· < ir and j1 < ··· < js. 1 The proof of this theorem is a little technical, but a few examples make it clear what is going on. For the proof, see for example Lemma 2.2 in [GZ67]. Example 1.1.6. Let f : [3] ! [1] be f0; 1 7! 0; 2; 3 7! 1g. One can easily check that f = s0 ◦ s2. Corollary 1.1.7. For any f 2 Hom∆([n]; [m]), there is a unique factorization s d f :[n] / / [k] / [m] where s is surjective and d injective. Corollary 1.1.8. The category ∆ can be presented by fdig and fsjg as generators with the following relations: djdi = didj−1 i < j j i i j+1 s s = s s i 6 j (1.1) 8 disj−1 if i < j <> sjdi = id if i = j or i = j + 1 :>di−1sj if i > j + 1 Corollary 1.1.9. Giving a simplicial set X∗ = fXngn>0 is equivalent to giving a family of sets fXng equipped with morphisms di : Xn ! Xn−1 and si : Xn ! Xn+1 satisfying didj = dj−1di i < j sisj = sj+1si i 6 j (1.2) 8 s d if i < j <> j−1 i disj = id if i = j or i = j + 1 > :sjdi−1 if i > j + 1 i i The relation between (1.1) and (1.2) is given by di = X(d ) and si = X(s ). Remark 1.1.10. It is convenient (at least morally) to think of simplicial sets as a graded right \module" over the category ∆, and of cosimplicial set as a graded left \module". A standard way to write X 2 Ob(sSets) is o o / X0 / X1 o X2 ::: o o / with solid arrows denoting the maps di and dashed arrows denoting the maps sj. Definition 1.1.11. For a simplicial set X the elements of Xn := X[n] 2 Sets are called n-simplices. 2 Definition 1.1.12. For a simplicial set X, an n-simplex x 2 Xn is called degenerate if x 2 Im(sj : Xn−1 ! Xn) for some j. The set of degenerate n-simplices is given by n−1 [ fdegenerate n-simplicesg = sj(Xn−1) j=0 An alternative way to describe degenerate simplices is provided by the following S Lemma 1.1.13. The set of degenerate n-simplices is exactly the set X(f)(Xk). f :[n][k] Proof. Exercise. Definition 1.1.14. If X = fXng is a simplicial set, and Yn ⊆ Xn is a family of subsets, 8n > 0, then we call Y = fYng a simplicial subset of X if • Y forms a simplicial set, • the inclusion Y,! X is a morphism of simplicial sets. The definition of simplicial (and cosimplicial) sets can be easily generalized to simplicial and cosimplicial objects in any category. Definition 1.1.15. For any category C we define a simplicial object in C as a functor ∆op ! C. The simplicial objects in any category C form a category, which we will denote by sC. Definition 1.1.16. Dually, we define a cosimplicial object in C as a (covariant) functor ∆ ! C. The category Fun(∆; C) of cosimplicial objects in C will be denoted by csC. 1.2 Motivation In this section we provide some motivation for the definition of simplicial sets, which might seem rather counter-intuitive. We will discuss various examples later in section 1.3 which will hopefully help to develop some intuition. Definition 1.2.1. The geometric n-dimensional simplex is the topological space ( n ) n n+1 X ∆ = (x0; : : : ; xn) 2 R : xi = 1; xi > 0 i=0 Thus ∆0 is a point, ∆1 is an interval, ∆2 is an equilateral triangle, ∆3 is a filled n n tetrahedron, etc. We will label the vertices of ∆ as e0; : : : ; en. Then any point x 2 ∆ P can be written as a linear combination x = xiei, where xi 2 R are called the barycentric coordinates of x. n To any subset α ⊂ [n] = f0; 1; : : : ; ng we can associate a simplex ∆α ⊂ ∆ , which is the n convex hull of vertices ei with i 2 α. The sub-simplex ∆α is also called α-face of ∆ . Thus we have a bijection fsubsets of [n]g $ ffaces of ∆ng. 3 Definition 1.2.2. By a finite polyhedron we mean a topological spaces X homeomorphic to a union of faces of a simplex ∆n: n X ' S = ∆α1 [···[ ∆αr ⊂ ∆ . The choice of such a homeomorphism is called a triangulation. Infinite polyhedra arize from simplicial complexes, which we define next. Definition 1.2.3. A simplicial complex X on a set V (called the set of vertices) is a collection of non-empty finite subsets of V , closed under taking subsets, i.e. 8σ 2 X; ;= 6 τ ⊂ σ ) τ 2 X. Note that the set V is not necessarily finite, nor V = S σ. To realize a simplicial σ2X complex X, we define an R-vector space V spanned by elements of V , and for every σ 2 X we define a simplex ∆σ ⊂ V to be the convex hull of σ ⊂ V ⊂ V. Definition 1.2.4. The realization jXj of a simplicial complex X is the union [ jXj = ∆σ ⊂ V σ2X equipped with induced topology from V, i.e. U ⊂ jXj is open if and only if U \ ∆σ is open in ∆σ for all σ 2 X. Definition 1.2.5. A polyhedron is a topological space homeomorphic to the realization jXj of some simplicial complex X. The quotient of a simplicial complex by a simplicial subcomplex may not be a simplicial complex again. Simplicial sets are then a generalization of simplicial complexes which \capture in full the homotopy theory of spaces". We will make this statement precise later when we will discuss Quillen equivalences, and in particular the Quillen equivalence between topological spaces and simplicial sets. To any simplicial complex one can associate a simplicial set in the following way. Suppose we have a simplicial complex (X; V ) with V being totally ordered. Define SS∗(X) to be a simplicial set having SSn(X) the set of ordered (n + 1)-tuples (v0; : : : ; vn), where vi 2 V are vertices such that fv0; : : : ; vng 2 X. Notice that we do allow vi = vj for some i 6= j in the tuple (v0; : : : ; vn), and fv0; : : : ; vng means the underlying set of that tuple. If f : [n] ! [m] is a morphism in ∆, the induced map f∗ : SSm(X) ! SSn(X) is given by (v0; : : : ; vn) 7! (vf(0); : : : ; vf(n)).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sheaves and Homotopy Theory
    SHEAVES AND HOMOTOPY THEORY DANIEL DUGGER The purpose of this note is to describe the homotopy-theoretic version of sheaf theory developed in the work of Thomason [14] and Jardine [7, 8, 9]; a few enhancements are provided here and there, but the bulk of the material should be credited to them. Their work is the foundation from which Morel and Voevodsky build their homotopy theory for schemes [12], and it is our hope that this exposition will be useful to those striving to understand that material. Our motivating examples will center on these applications to algebraic geometry. Some history: The machinery in question was invented by Thomason as the main tool in his proof of the Lichtenbaum-Quillen conjecture for Bott-periodic algebraic K-theory. He termed his constructions `hypercohomology spectra', and a detailed examination of their basic properties can be found in the first section of [14]. Jardine later showed how these ideas can be elegantly rephrased in terms of model categories (cf. [8], [9]). In this setting the hypercohomology construction is just a certain fibrant replacement functor. His papers convincingly demonstrate how many questions concerning algebraic K-theory or ´etale homotopy theory can be most naturally understood using the model category language. In this paper we set ourselves the specific task of developing some kind of homotopy theory for schemes. The hope is to demonstrate how Thomason's and Jardine's machinery can be built, step-by-step, so that it is precisely what is needed to solve the problems we encounter. The papers mentioned above all assume a familiarity with Grothendieck topologies and sheaf theory, and proceed to develop the homotopy-theoretic situation as a generalization of the classical case.
    [Show full text]
  • Simplicial Sets, Nerves of Categories, Kan Complexes, Etc
    SIMPLICIAL SETS, NERVES OF CATEGORIES, KAN COMPLEXES, ETC FOLING ZOU These notes are taken from Peter May's classes in REU 2018. Some notations may be changed to the note taker's preference and some detailed definitions may be skipped and can be found in other good notes such as [2] or [3]. The note taker is responsible for any mistakes. 1. simplicial approach to defining homology Defnition 1. A simplical set/group/object K is a sequence of sets/groups/objects Kn for each n ≥ 0 with face maps: di : Kn ! Kn−1; 0 ≤ i ≤ n and degeneracy maps: si : Kn ! Kn+1; 0 ≤ i ≤ n satisfying certain commutation equalities. Images of degeneracy maps are said to be degenerate. We can define a functor: ordered abstract simplicial complex ! sSet; K 7! Ks; where s Kn = fv0 ≤ · · · ≤ vnjfv0; ··· ; vng (may have repetition) is a simplex in Kg: s s Face maps: di : Kn ! Kn−1; 0 ≤ i ≤ n is by deleting vi; s s Degeneracy maps: si : Kn ! Kn+1; 0 ≤ i ≤ n is by repeating vi: In this way it is very straightforward to remember the equalities that face maps and degeneracy maps have to satisfy. The simplical viewpoint is helpful in establishing invariants and comparing different categories. For example, we are going to define the integral homology of a simplicial set, which will agree with the simplicial homology on a simplical complex, but have the virtue of avoiding the barycentric subdivision in showing functoriality and homotopy invariance of homology. This is an observation made by Samuel Eilenberg. To start, we construct functors: F C sSet sAb ChZ: The functor F is the free abelian group functor applied levelwise to a simplical set.
    [Show full text]
  • Homotopy Coherent Structures
    HOMOTOPY COHERENT STRUCTURES EMILY RIEHL Abstract. Naturally occurring diagrams in algebraic topology are commuta- tive up to homotopy, but not on the nose. It was quickly realized that very little can be done with this information. Homotopy coherent category theory arose out of a desire to catalog the higher homotopical information required to restore constructibility (or more precisely, functoriality) in such “up to homo- topy” settings. The first lecture will survey the classical theory of homotopy coherent diagrams of topological spaces. The second lecture will revisit the free resolutions used to define homotopy coherent diagrams and prove that they can also be understood as homotopy coherent realizations. This explains why diagrams valued in homotopy coherent nerves or more general 1-categories are automatically homotopy coherent. The final lecture will venture into ho- motopy coherent algebra, connecting the newly discovered notion of homotopy coherent adjunction to the classical cobar and bar resolutions for homotopy coherent algebras. Contents Part I. Homotopy coherent diagrams 2 I.1. Historical motivation 2 I.2. The shape of a homotopy coherent diagram 3 I.3. Homotopy coherent diagrams and homotopy coherent natural transformations 7 Part II. Homotopy coherent realization and the homotopy coherent nerve 10 II.1. Free resolutions are simplicial computads 11 II.2. Homotopy coherent realization and the homotopy coherent nerve 13 II.3. Further applications 17 Part III. Homotopy coherent algebra 17 III.1. From coherent homotopy theory to coherent category theory 17 III.2. Monads in category theory 19 III.3. Homotopy coherent monads 19 III.4. Homotopy coherent adjunctions 21 Date: July 12-14, 2017.
    [Show full text]
  • Quasi-Categories Vs Simplicial Categories
    Quasi-categories vs Simplicial categories Andr´eJoyal January 07 2007 Abstract We show that the coherent nerve functor from simplicial categories to simplicial sets is the right adjoint in a Quillen equivalence between the model category for simplicial categories and the model category for quasi-categories. Introduction A quasi-category is a simplicial set which satisfies a set of conditions introduced by Boardman and Vogt in their work on homotopy invariant algebraic structures [BV]. A quasi-category is often called a weak Kan complex in the literature. The category of simplicial sets S admits a Quillen model structure in which the cofibrations are the monomorphisms and the fibrant objects are the quasi- categories [J2]. We call it the model structure for quasi-categories. The resulting model category is Quillen equivalent to the model category for complete Segal spaces and also to the model category for Segal categories [JT2]. The goal of this paper is to show that it is also Quillen equivalent to the model category for simplicial categories via the coherent nerve functor of Cordier. We recall that a simplicial category is a category enriched over the category of simplicial sets S. To every simplicial category X we can associate a category X0 enriched over the homotopy category of simplicial sets Ho(S). A simplicial functor f : X → Y is called a Dwyer-Kan equivalence if the functor f 0 : X0 → Y 0 is an equivalence of Ho(S)-categories. It was proved by Bergner, that the category of (small) simplicial categories SCat admits a Quillen model structure in which the weak equivalences are the Dwyer-Kan equivalences [B1].
    [Show full text]
  • Comparison of Waldhausen Constructions
    COMPARISON OF WALDHAUSEN CONSTRUCTIONS JULIA E. BERGNER, ANGELICA´ M. OSORNO, VIKTORIYA OZORNOVA, MARTINA ROVELLI, AND CLAUDIA I. SCHEIMBAUER Dedicated to the memory of Thomas Poguntke Abstract. In previous work, we develop a generalized Waldhausen S•- construction whose input is an augmented stable double Segal space and whose output is a 2-Segal space. Here, we prove that this construc- tion recovers the previously known S•-constructions for exact categories and for stable and exact (∞, 1)-categories, as well as the relative S•- construction for exact functors. Contents Introduction 2 1. Augmented stable double Segal objects 3 2. The S•-construction for exact categories 7 3. The S•-construction for stable (∞, 1)-categories 17 4. The S•-construction for proto-exact (∞, 1)-categories 23 5. The relative S•-construction 26 Appendix: Some results on quasi-categories 33 References 38 Date: May 29, 2020. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 55U10, 55U35, 55U40, 18D05, 18G55, 18G30, arXiv:1901.03606v2 [math.AT] 28 May 2020 19D10. Key words and phrases. 2-Segal spaces, Waldhausen S•-construction, double Segal spaces, model categories. The first-named author was partially supported by NSF CAREER award DMS- 1659931. The second-named author was partially supported by a grant from the Simons Foundation (#359449, Ang´elica Osorno), the Woodrow Wilson Career Enhancement Fel- lowship and NSF grant DMS-1709302. The fourth-named and fifth-named authors were partially funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation, grants P2ELP2 172086 and P300P2 164652. The fifth-named author was partially funded by the Bergen Research Foundation and would like to thank the University of Oxford for its hospitality.
    [Show full text]
  • Quasicategories 1.1 Simplicial Sets
    Quasicategories 12 November 2018 1.1 Simplicial sets We denote by ∆ the category whose objects are the sets [n] = f0; 1; : : : ; ng for n ≥ 0 and whose morphisms are order-preserving functions [n] ! [m]. A simplicial set is a functor X : ∆op ! Set, where Set denotes the category of sets. A simplicial map f : X ! Y between simplicial sets is a natural transforma- op tion. The category of simplicial sets with simplicial maps is denoted by Set∆ or, more concisely, as sSet. For a simplicial set X, we normally write Xn instead of X[n], and call it the n set of n-simplices of X. There are injections δi :[n − 1] ! [n] forgetting i and n surjections σi :[n + 1] ! [n] repeating i for 0 ≤ i ≤ n that give rise to functions n n di : Xn −! Xn−1; si : Xn+1 −! Xn; called faces and degeneracies respectively. Since every order-preserving function [n] ! [m] is a composite of a surjection followed by an injection, the sets fXngn≥0 k ` together with the faces di and degeneracies sj determine uniquely a simplicial set X. Faces and degeneracies satisfy the simplicial identities: n−1 n n−1 n di ◦ dj = dj−1 ◦ di if i < j; 8 sn−1 ◦ dn if i < j; > j−1 i n+1 n < di ◦ sj = idXn if i = j or i = j + 1; :> n−1 n sj ◦ di−1 if i > j + 1; n+1 n n+1 n si ◦ sj = sj+1 ◦ si if i ≤ j: For n ≥ 0, the standard n-simplex is the simplicial set ∆[n] = ∆(−; [n]), that is, ∆[n]m = ∆([m]; [n]) for all m ≥ 0.
    [Show full text]
  • A Model Structure for Quasi-Categories
    A MODEL STRUCTURE FOR QUASI-CATEGORIES EMILY RIEHL DISCUSSED WITH J. P. MAY 1. Introduction Quasi-categories live at the intersection of homotopy theory with category theory. In particular, they serve as a model for (1; 1)-categories, that is, weak higher categories with n-cells for each natural number n that are invertible when n > 1. Alternatively, an (1; 1)-category is a category enriched in 1-groupoids, e.g., a topological space with points as 0-cells, paths as 1-cells, homotopies of paths as 2-cells, and homotopies of homotopies as 3-cells, and so forth. The basic data for a quasi-category is a simplicial set. A precise definition is given below. For now, a simplicial set X is given by a diagram in Set o o / X o X / X o ··· 0 o / 1 o / 2 o / o o / with certain relations on the arrows. Elements of Xn are called n-simplices, and the arrows di : Xn ! Xn−1 and si : Xn ! Xn+1 are called face and degeneracy maps, respectively. Intuition is provided by simplical complexes from topology. There is a functor τ1 from the category of simplicial sets to Cat that takes a simplicial set X to its fundamental category τ1X. The objects of τ1X are the elements of X0. Morphisms are generated by elements of X1 with the face maps defining the source and target and s0 : X0 ! X1 picking out the identities. Composition is freely generated by elements of X1 subject to relations given by elements of X2. More specifically, if x 2 X2, then we impose the relation that d1x = d0x ◦ d2x.
    [Show full text]
  • Complex Oriented Cohomology Theories and the Language of Stacks
    COMPLEX ORIENTED COHOMOLOGY THEORIES AND THE LANGUAGE OF STACKS COURSE NOTES FOR 18.917, TAUGHT BY MIKE HOPKINS Contents Introduction 1 1. Complex Oriented Cohomology Theories 2 2. Formal Group Laws 4 3. Proof of the Symmetric Cocycle Lemma 7 4. Complex Cobordism and MU 11 5. The Adams spectral sequence 14 6. The Hopf Algebroid (MU∗; MU∗MU) and formal groups 18 7. More on isomorphisms, strict isomorphisms, and π∗E ^ E: 22 8. STACKS 25 9. Stacks and Associated Stacks 29 10. More on Stacks and associated stacks 32 11. Sheaves on stacks 36 12. A calculation and the link to topology 37 13. Formal groups in prime characteristic 40 14. The automorphism group of the Lubin-Tate formal group laws 46 15. Formal Groups 48 16. Witt Vectors 50 17. Classifying Lifts | The Lubin-Tate Space 53 18. Cohomology of stacks, with applications 59 19. p-typical Formal Group Laws. 63 20. Stacks: what's up with that? 67 21. The Landweber exact functor theorem 71 References 74 Introduction This text contains the notes from a course taught at MIT in the spring of 1999, whose topics revolved around the use of stacks in studying complex oriented cohomology theories. The notes were compiled by the graduate students attending the class, and it should perhaps be acknowledged (with regret) that we recorded only the mathematics and not the frequent jokes and amusing sideshows which accompanied it. Please be wary of the fact that what you have in your hands is the `alpha- version' of the text, which is only slightly more than our direct transcription of the stream-of- consciousness lectures.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1311.4128V4 [Math.QA] 18 Sep 2015 Ob Klocalization
    DWYER-KAN LOCALIZATION REVISITED VLADIMIR HINICH To the memory of Daniel Kan Abstract. A version of Dwyer-Kan localization in the context of ∞-categories and simplicial categories is presented. Some results of the classical papers [DK1, DK2, DK3] are reproven and generalized. We prove that a Quillen pair of model categories gives rise to an adjoint pair of their DK localizations (considered as ∞-categories). We study families of ∞-categories and present a result on localization of a family of ∞-categories. This is applied to local- ization of symmetric monoidal ∞-categories where we were able to get only partial results. Introduction This paper was devised as an appendix to [H.R] intended to describe necessary prerequisites about localization in (∞, 1)-categories. The task turned out to be more serious and more interesting than was originally believed. This is why we finally decided to present it as a separate text. The paper consists of three sections. In Section 1 we present a version of Dwyer- Kan localization in the context of ∞-categories 1 and simplicial categories. The original approach of Dwyer and Kan [DK1, DK2, DK3] is replaced, in the con- text of ∞-categories, with a description using universal property. We compare the approaches showing that the homotopy coherent nerve carries hammock lo- calization of fibrant simplicial categories to a localization of ∞-category in our universal sense. arXiv:1311.4128v4 [math.QA] 18 Sep 2015 A very important example of Dwyer-Kan localization is the underlying ∞- category of a model category. We reprove the classical result [DK3], Proposition 5.2, and prove a generalization of [DK3], 4.8, giving various equivalent descrip- tions of this localization.
    [Show full text]
  • Optimal Triangulation of Regular Simplicial Sets
    OPTIMAL TRIANGULATION OF REGULAR SIMPLICIAL SETS A PREPRINT Vegard Fjellbo Department of Mathematics University of Oslo Oslo, Norway [email protected] January 14, 2020 ABSTRACT The Barratt nerve, denoted B, is the endofunctor that takes a simplicial set to the nerve of the poset of its non-degenerate simplices. The ordered simplicial complex BSdX, namely the Barratt nerve of the Kan subdivision SdX, is a triangulation of the original simplicial set X in the sense that there is a natural map BSdX → X whose geometric realization is homotopic to some homeomorphism. This is a refinement to the result that any simplicial set can be triangulated. A simplicial set is said to be regular if each of its non-degenerate simplices is embedded along its n-th face. That BSdX → X is a triangulation of X is a consequence of the fact that the Kan subdivision makes simplicial sets regular and that BX is a triangulation of X whenever X is regular. In this paper, we argue that B, interpreted as a functor from regular to non-singular simplicial sets, is not just any triangulation, but in fact the best. We mean this in the sense that B is the left Kan extension of barycentric subdivision along the Yoneda embedding. Keywords Triangulation · Regular simplicial set · Barratt nerve 1 Introduction Not every CW complex can be triangulated [1], but simplicial sets can. The latter fact is largely due to Barratt [2], but a correctproofwas first givenby Fritsch and Puppein [3]. One can proveit by arguingthat all regular CW complexesare trianguable, that regular simplicial sets give rise to regular CW complexes and that the geometric realization of the last vertex map dX : SdX → X [4, §7], from the Kan subdivision SdX of X [4, §7], is homotopic to a homeomorphism.
    [Show full text]
  • Stable Equivariant Motivic Homotopy Theory and Motivic Borel Cohomology
    STABLE EQUIVARIANT MOTIVIC HOMOTOPY THEORY AND MOTIVIC BOREL COHOMOLOGY Dissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades (Dr. rer. nat.) des Fachbereichs Mathematik/Informatik an der Universit¨atOsnabr¨uck vorgelegt von Philip Herrmann aus Bielefeld Institut f¨urMathematik Universit¨atOsnabr¨uck Osnabr¨uck, den 19. Juni 2012 Acknowledgements First of all, I would like to thank my advisor Oliver R¨ondigsfor all the discus- sions, his care and encouragement. I have always benefited a lot from his advice. It is also a pleasure to thank Paul Arne Østvær for his invitation to a one month research visit in Oslo in May 2011, for valuable conversations, and for writing a report about this thesis. Further, I need to emphasize huge gratitude to my office mate Florian Strunk for sharing his mathematical passion with me since we were undergraduates and for having become a great friend. Many discussions with Florian have enriched [HS11] my life in several ways. Also I am indebted to Ben Williams for sharing his interest in the particular topic of this dissertation and for several related discussions. While working on this dissertation I was supported by the Graduate School 'Combinatorial Structures in Algebra and Topology' and the Mathematical In- stitute of the University of Osnabr¨uck. I am deeply grateful for the excellent working environment and the support of many conference visits they provided to me. Some of these visits were partially financed by different institutions and I am thankful to the Universit¨atsgesellschaft Osnabr¨uck, the Mathematisches Forschungsinstitut Oberwolfach, the UCLA, and the Universities of Bonn and M¨unster. Many other people deserve my thanks and I am deeply thankful to my friends, to my colleagues in Osnabr¨uck, and to the group of those that I have forgot to mention on this page.
    [Show full text]
  • Symmetric Monoidal Categories Model All
    Theory and Applications of CategoriesVol No pp SYMMETRIC MONOIDAL CATEGORIES MODEL ALL CONNECTIVE SPECTRA R W THOMASON Transmitted by Myles Tierney Abstract The classical innite lo opspace machines in fact induce an equivalence of categories b etween a lo calization of the category of symmetric monoidal categories and the stable homotopy category of connective sp ectra Intro duction Since the early seventies it has b een known that the classifying spaces of small symmetric monoidal categories are innite lo op spaces the zeroth space in a sp ectrum a sequence of spaces X i with given homotopyequivalences to the lo ops on the succeeding i space X X Indeed many of the classical examples of innite lo op spaces i i were found as such classifying spaces eg Ma Se These innite lo op spaces and sp ectra are of great interest to top ologists The homotopy category formed byinverting the weak equivalences of sp ectra is the stable homotopy categorymuch b etter b ehaved than but still closely related to the usual homotopy category of spaces eg Ad I I I One has in fact classically a functor Spt from the category of small symmetric mo noidal categories to the category of connective sp ectra those sp ectra X for which i X when ki Ma Se Th Moreover anytwosuch functors satisfying k i the condition that the zeroth space of SptS is the group completion of the classifying space B S are naturally homotopy equivalent Ma Th The aim of this article is to prove the new result Thm that in fact Spt induces an equivalence of categories b etween the
    [Show full text]