From: Michael Batanin <mbatanin@ics.mq.edu.au>
To: Andre Joyal <joyal.andre@uqam.ca>
Subject: Re: calculus, homotopy theory and more (corrected)
Date: Thu, 13 May 2010 16:56:02 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <E1OCY36-0007DM-Ms@mailserv.mta.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <B3C24EA955FF0C4EA14658997CD3E25E370F57F8@CAHIER.gst.uqam.ca>
Dear Andre,
thank you for your very nice posting. If I understood correctly your
proof of stabilization hypothesis it is based on classical Freudenthal
theorem. I can not resist sketching another proof (this is joint work
with Clemens Berger and Denis-Charles Cisinski) from which Freudenthal
theorem is a consequence.
It is based on the use of higher braided operads. Classically one can
consider nonsymmetric, braided and symmetric operads with the values in
a symmetric monoidal category V. If V is in addition a model category
one can speak about contractible operads. When V = Cat, for example,the
category of algebras of contractible nonsymmetric (braided, symmetric)
operads is (=Quillen equivalent) to the category of monoidal categories
(braided, symmetric). This prompts a line of thinking that the category
of k-braided (weak) n-categories must be an algebra of a
contractible k-braided operad with values in Cat_n.
It is well known that we can not define k-braided operads in classical
terms (i.e. a sequence of objects with action of some groups and a
compatible substitution). The contradiction here is that for a
contractible such operad to have a right homotopy type the quotient of
its m-th space by group actions must have the homotopy type of space
of (nonordered) configuration of m-points in R^k. And this is not a
K(\pi,1) space unless k=1,2,\infty.
Nevertheless, one can overcome this difficulty if instead of group
action we consider an action of a category. Formally we consider a
category of quasibijections of k-ordinals (or maps of pruned k-trees,
which are bijections on the highest level) Q_k. The m-th connected
component of the nerve of this category has homotopy type of the space
of (nonordered) configuration of m-points in R^k. Then a k-collection is
a contravaliant functor Q_k --> V. One can construct a category of
operads O_n(V) which have k-collections as underlying collections:
arXiv:0804.4165 Locally constant n-operads as higher braided operads. M.
A. Batanin.
Finally, we define a k-braided operad to be an object of O_k(V) such
that the action of any quasibijection is a weak equivalence. Obviously a
contractible k-operad is a k-braided operad.
We want, actually, a bit more and define a model category of k-braided
operads. This can be done by an appropriate Bousfield localization
O_k^loc(V) of the model category O_k(V). The fibrant objects in
O_k^loc(V) are precisely fibrant k-braided operads.
There is also a simple functor
S: O_{k+1}(V) --> O_k(V)
induced by inclusion
s: Q_k --> Q_{k+1}
(add a tail to any pruned tree of height k).
This functor has a left adjoint, moreover, this pair of adjoint induces
a pair of Quillen functors between localised categories
S^{loc}: O_{k+1}^{loc}(V) <==> O_k^{loc}(V):F^{loc}
Theorem [Operadic stabilisation]:
Let V be n-truncated as a model category and k is greater or equal to n+2.
Then the Quillen adjunction
S^{loc} |- F^{loc}
is a Quillen equivalence. Moreover,
in this case the symmetrisation functor
sym:O_k^{loc}(V) --> SO(V)
is the left Quillen equivalence (SO(V) is the category of symmetric
operads).
Proof. It follows from an explicit calculation of the derived left Kan
extension along the functor s: Q_k --> Q_{k+1} and the fact that s
induces an isomorphism of the m-th homotopy groups of the nerves when
m < k-2 , k>2 (k=2 is special and corresponds to the canonical
homomorphism from braid groups to symmetric groups).
Let us define the model category Br_k(V) of k-braided object in V as the
category of one object, one arrow, ..., one (k-1)-arrow algebras of a
contractible cofibrant k-operad. The (derived) Eckman-Hilton argument
shows that it is Quilen equivalent to the category E_k(V) of
E_k-algebras in V.
Let V be an n-truncated symmetric monoidal model category and k is
greater or equal to n+2.
Then the total left derived functor LF^{loc} map contractible
k-operads to contractible (k+1)-operads and Lsym map contractible
operads to E_{\infty}-operads. So we have a Quillen equivalence of the
categories
E_k(V) --> Br_k(V) --> Br_{k+1}(Cat_n)--> E_{\infty}(V).
Corollary 1[BBD stabilization hypothesis]
Take V=Cat_n (for example, Cat_n = Rezk n-categories).
Corollary 2 [Freudenthal theorem]
V = n-homotopy types.
I have little understanding of Goodwillie calculus but I know that
operads play an important role in it.
It would be very interested to see what corresponds in calculus to
operadic stabilization.
with best regards,
Michael.
Joyal wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> The shift n-->n+1 which occurs in the terminologies
>
> "n-braided monoidal category" = "(n+1)fold monoidal category"
>
> "n-connected spaces" = "(n+1)fold loop spaces"
>
> is very natural. A similar shift occurs in calculus.
> The analogy between calculus and homotopy theory is far reaching.
> It is the basis of the theory of analytic functors of Goodwilie.
>
> http://www.math.brown.edu/faculty/goodwillie.html
> http://arxiv.org/abs/math/0310481
> http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Goodwillie+calculus
>
> I would to describe the very elementary aspects of this theory.
> I will also say a few things about the Breen-Baez-Dolan Stabilisation
> Hypothesis,
> claiming that it is a theorem.
>
> Let me denote by K[[x]] the ring of formal power series in one
> variable over a field K. The ring K[[x]] bears some ressemblance
> with the category of pointed homotopy types (= pointed spaces up
> to weak homotopy equivalences). The category of pointed
> homotopy types is a ring (the product is the smash product
> and the sum is the wedge).
>
> K === the category of pointed sets
>
> K[[x]]=== the category of pointed homotopy types
>
> x === the pointed circle.
>
> The augmentation K[[x]]-->K
> === the functor pi_0: pointed homotopy types ---> pointed sets
>
> The augmentation ideal J
> === the subcategory of pointed connected spaces.
>
> The n+1 power of the augmentation ideal J^{n+1}
> === the subcategory of pointed n-connected spaces.
>
> The product of an element in J^{n+1} with an element of J^{m+1}
> is an element of J^{n+m+2}
> === the smash product of a n-connected space with
> a m-connected space is (n+m+1)-connected.
>
> Multiplication by x === the suspension functor.
>
> Division by x === the loop space functor.
> Notice here the difference: the loop functor is right adjoint to
> the suspension functor, not its inverse. Moreover,
> the loop space of a space has a special structure (it is a group).
> The ideal J=xK[[x]] is isomorphic to K[[x]] via division by x.
> Similarly, the category of pointed connected spaces is equivalent to
> the category of topological groups via the loop space functor
> (it is actually an equivalence of model categories).
> More generally, the ideal J^{n+1} is isomorphic to K[[x]] via division
> by x^{n+1}.
> Similarly, the category of n-connected space is equivalent to
> the category of (n+1)-fold topological group (it is actually an
> equivalence of model categories) via the (n+1)-fold loop space functor.
>
>
>
> The quotient ring K[[x]]/J^{n+1} === the category of n-truncated
> homotopy types (=n-types)
>
> The sequence of approximations of a formal power series f(x)=a_0+a_1x+...
> a_0
> a_0+a_1x
> a_0+a_1x+a_2x^2
> ...
> ...
>
> === the Postnikov tower of a pointed homotopy type X:
> [pi0X]
> [pi0X;pi1X]
> [pi0X;pi1X,pi2X]
> ...
> ...
> Here, pi0X is the set of components of X,
> [pi0X;pi1X] is the fundamental groupoid of X,
> [pi0X;pi1X,pi2X] is the fundamental 2-groupoid of X, etc.
>
>
> The differences between f(x) and its successives approximations
>
> R0 = f(x)-a_0 = a_1x+a_2x^2+a_3x^3+....
> R1 = f(x)-(a_0+a_1x) = a_2x^2+a_3x^3+a_4x^4+....
> R2 = f(x)-(a_0+a_1x+a_2x^2) = a_3x^3+a_4x^4+a_5x^5+....
>
> ===the Whitehead tower of X,
>
> C_0=[0;pi1X, pi2X, pi3X,....]
> C_1=[0;0,pi2X,pi3X, pi4X,....]
> C_2=[0;0,0,pi3X,pi4X,pi4X,....]
> ....
> ....
> Here, C_0 is the connected component of X at the base point,
> C_1 is the universal cover of X constructed by from paths starting at
> the base point,
> C_2 is the universal 2-cover of X constructed from paths starting the
> base point, etc.
>
>
> Division by x is shifting down the coefficients of a power series
> If f(x)=a_1x+a_2x^2+..., then f(x)/x= a_1+a_2x+...
> Similarly, the loop space functor is shifting down the homotopy groups
> of a pointed space: if X=[a_0;a_1,a_2,...] then Loop(X)=[a_1;a_2,....].
>
> Unfortunately, the suspension functor does not shift up the homotopy
> groups of a space.
> It is however shifting the first 2n homotopy groups of n-connected space
> X (n geq 1)
> by a theorem of Freudenthal:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freudenthal_suspension_theorem
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Freudenthal
>
> For example, if X=[0;0,a_2, a_3,...] (n=1) then Susp(X)=[0;0,0,a_2,b_3...],
> and if X=[0;0,0, a_3, a_4, a_5,...] (n=2) then Susp(X)=[0;0,0, 0, a_3,
> a_4, b_5,...].
> In other words, the canonical map
>
> X-->LoopSusp(X)
>
> is a 2n-equivalence if X is n-connected (n geq 1).
> If X[2n] denotes the 2n-type of X (the 2n-truncation of X),
> then we have a homotopy equivalence
>
> X[2n]-->LoopSusp(X)[2n]=Loop(Susp(X)[2n+1]).
>
> It follows that if X is a n-connected 2n homotopy type then
> we have a homotopy equivalence
>
> X--->Loop(X')
>
> where X'=Susp(X)[2n+1]. The space X' is said to
> be a *delooping* of X. By iterating this construction
> we can construct an infinite sequence of spaces
>
> X=X_0, X_1, X_2,....
>
> such that X_n=Loop(X_{n+1}). In other words,
>
> *a n-connected 2n homotopy type is an infinite loop space (canonically)*
>
> The (n+1)-fold loop space of a n-connected space
> is an E(n+1)-space (a E(n)-space is a model of the little n-cubes
> operad of Boardman and Vogt, a E(1)-space is a monoid,
> a E(2)-space is a braided monoid,...).
> The (n+1)-fold loop space functor induces an equivalence between the
> category of n-connected spaces and the category of group-like E(n+1)-space
> (a monoid M is said to be group-like if pi0(M) is a group).
> Observe that the (n+1)-fold loop space of a 2n-type is a (n-1)-type.
> Freudenthal theorem implies that
>
> *If a (n-1) homotopy type has the structure of a group-like E(n+1)-space
> then it has also the structure of an E(infty)-space (canonically)*
>
> A nicer statement is obtained by shifting the index n by one.
>
> * If a n-type has the structure of a group-like E(n+2)-space then it
> has also the structure of an E(infty)-space (canonically)*
>
> The group-like condition can be dropped:
>
> *If a n-type has the structure of an E(n+2)-space then it has
> the the structure of an E(infty)-space (canonically)*
>
> This is a special case of the Stabilisation Hypothesis of Breen-Baez-Dolan;
>
> *If a n-category has the structure of an E(n+2)-category then it has the
> structure of
> symmetric monoidal category (canonically)*
>
> (Equivalently, *If a monoidal n-category is (n+1)-braided then it has
> the structure of
> symmetric monoidal category (canonically)*)
>
> It is not difficult to verify that these statements are formally equivalent.
>
> The Breen-Baez-Dolan Stabilisation Hypothesis is a theorem.
>
>
> Best,
> André
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
[For admin and other information see: http://www.mta.ca/~cat-dist/ ]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-05-13 6:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-05-08 3:27 RE : bilax monoidal functors John Baez
2010-05-09 10:38 ` autonomous terminology: WAS: " Dusko Pavlovic
2010-05-09 22:41 ` Colin McLarty
2010-05-10 12:09 ` posina
2010-05-10 17:40 ` Jeff Egger
2010-05-09 16:26 ` bilax_monoidal_functors?= Andre Joyal
2010-05-10 14:58 ` bilax_monoidal_functors?= Eduardo J. Dubuc
2010-05-10 19:28 ` bilax_monoidal_functors Jeff Egger
2010-05-13 17:17 ` bilax_monoidal_functors Michael Shulman
2010-05-14 14:43 ` terminology (was: bilax_monoidal_functors) Peter Selinger
2010-05-15 19:52 ` terminology Toby Bartels
2010-05-15 1:05 ` bilax_monoidal_functors Andre Joyal
[not found] ` <20100514144324.D83A35C275@chase.mathstat.dal.ca>
2010-05-15 4:41 ` terminology (was: bilax_monoidal_functors) Michael Shulman
2010-05-10 10:28 ` bilax monoidal functors Urs Schreiber
2010-05-11 3:17 ` bilax_monoidal_functors Andre Joyal
[not found] ` <4BE81F26.4020903@dm.uba.ar>
2010-05-10 18:16 ` bilax_monoidal_functors?= John Baez
2010-05-11 1:04 ` bilax_monoidal_functors?= Michael Shulman
2010-05-12 20:02 ` calculus, homotopy theory and more Andre Joyal
[not found] ` <B3C24EA955FF0C4EA14658997CD3E25E370F57F6@CAHIER.gst.uqam.ca>
[not found] ` <B3C24EA955FF0C4EA14658997CD3E25E370F57F8@CAHIER.gst.uqam.ca>
2010-05-13 6:56 ` Michael Batanin [this message]
[not found] ` <B3C24EA955FF0C4EA14658997CD3E25E370F57FE@CAHIER.gst.uqam.ca>
2010-05-13 22:59 ` calculus, homotopy theory and more (corrected) Michael Batanin
[not found] ` <4BEC846B.5050000@ics.mq.edu.au>
2010-05-14 2:53 ` Andre Joyal
2010-05-11 8:28 ` bilax_monoidal_functors?= Michael Batanin
2010-05-12 3:02 ` bilax_monoidal_functors?= Toby Bartels
2010-05-13 23:09 ` bilax_monoidal_functors?= Michael Batanin
2010-05-15 16:05 ` terminology Joyal, André
[not found] ` <4BEC8698.3090408@ics.mq.edu.au>
2010-05-14 18:41 ` bilax_monoidal_functors? Toby Bartels
2010-05-15 16:54 ` bilax_monoidal_functors Jeff Egger
2010-05-14 14:34 ` bilax_monoidal_functors Michael Shulman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=E1OCY36-0007DM-Ms@mailserv.mta.ca \
--to=mbatanin@ics.mq.edu.au \
--cc=joyal.andre@uqam.ca \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).