Discussion of Homotopy Type Theory and Univalent Foundations
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Roberts <drobert...@gmail.com>
To: Vladimir Voevodsky <vlad...@ias.edu>
Cc: homotopytypetheory <homotopyt...@googlegroups.com>,
	 Urs Schreiber <urs.sc...@googlemail.com>,
	Martin Escardo <m.es...@cs.bham.ac.uk>,
	 Andrew Polonsky <andrew....@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HoTT] Re: What is UF, what is HoTT and what is a univalent type theory?
Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2016 17:02:14 +0930	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFL+ZM8zEAfe4Aq0Mq7tsbUTz6yFqAaTiNzetANE7W3pE+8mjQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7AC24044-EDEF-4490-BC72-24885504B619@ias.edu>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4226 bytes --]

Dear Vladimir,

Please see Charles Rezk's work on globally equivariant homotopy theoretic
models of cohesion. It is not something out of Urs' imagination.

Also, if something is false, call it false, not a 'lie', and provide a
mathematical basis for such a statement.

Best regards,
David
On 6 Jun 2016 4:45 pm, "Vladimir Voevodsky" <vlad...@ias.edu> wrote:

> Dear Urs,
>
> > For instance a class of (infinity,1)-categories that geometric
> > representation theorists care about is neatly obtained in HoTT by just
> > adding a certain adjoint triple of modal operators (differential
> > cohesion)
>
> this is a lie.
>
> Geometric representation theorists care about the (infty,1)-categories
> that corresponds to different groups and to their interaction with each
> other. They care not about sitting inside one universal (infty,1)-category.
>
> Vladimir.
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 4, 2016, at 9:11 AM, Urs Schreiber <urs.sc...@googlemail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> They don’t take us seriously so far because we can not define
> >> (infty,1)-categories.
> >
> > The good news is, without even having to define them, HoTT already is
> > the internal language of certain (infinity,1)-categories. Which ones
> > precisely depends on which axioms are added or omitted.
> >
> > For instance a class of (infinity,1)-categories that geometric
> > representation theorists care about is neatly obtained in HoTT by just
> > adding a certain adjoint triple of modal operators (differential
> > cohesion) This yields a synthetic axiomatization of the homotopy
> > theory of D-modules and their representation theory, which is what is
> > mostly meant by "geometric representation theory".
> >
> > This route is the homotopy version of Lawvere's seminal vision of all
> > mathematics taking place synthetically inside a suitable elementary
> > topos. It's slightly ironic that this route is not more popular.
> > Because over in the community of ordinary (i.e. non-type theoretic)
> > infinity-category theory, there is the nagging feeling that handling
> > all those incarnations of infinity categories as simplicial and n-fold
> > simplicial objects from the outside may be rather inefficient for
> > deriving results. In order to overcome this there is the work on
> > derivators and the work by Riehl-Verity.
> >
> > A colleague of mine championing derivators praises the fact that they
> > offer him a formal way to verify the simplicial reasoning in work by
> > Lurie et al, which he finds intricate to the point of being
> > unverifiable to him. This certainly applies to other people, too.
> >
> > To check this, you should do a survey among your colleagues whether or
> > not they think that Lurie actually gave a proof of the cobordism
> > hypothesis. Lurie gives an intriciate argument in terms of
> > infinity-categories modeled on simplicial set, and while I fully trust
> > that it is correct, it is true that it gets to the point of compexity
> > where it seems that checking the proof is not just a matter of
> > mchanically checking derivation steps, but requires extra ingenuity.
> >
> > Now, HoTT, regarded as an internal language, shares with the concept
> > of derivators the potential to make much of this somewhat
> > messy-looking simplicial infinity-category theory become more
> > transparent and systematic, more mechanical. Therefore it might be
> > argued to be a little be backwards to try to force that messy
> > simplicial technology to realize itself inside HoTT. It might be
> > missing the golden opportunity to turn this around and use the
> > synthetic reasong.
> >
> > There is now one person, Felix Wellen, working on formalizing some
> > first basics of geometric representation theory within differentially
> > cohesion HoTT. I think it's a topic with plenty of opportunity.
> >
> > Best wishes,
> > urs
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Homotopy Type Theory" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to HomotopyTypeThe...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5075 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2016-06-06  7:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-06-02 21:29 Martin Escardo
2016-06-03 11:53 ` Andrew Polonsky
2016-06-03 12:49   ` [HoTT] " Vladimir Voevodsky
2016-06-03 14:12     ` Andrew Polonsky
2016-06-03 19:29       ` Vladimir Voevodsky
2016-06-03 22:05         ` andré hirschowitz
2016-06-04  8:38           ` Vladimir Voevodsky
2016-06-04  9:56             ` andré hirschowitz
2016-06-06  8:10               ` [HoTT] " Vladimir Voevodsky
2016-06-04  6:11         ` [HoTT] " Urs Schreiber
2016-06-06  7:14           ` Vladimir Voevodsky
2016-06-06  7:32             ` David Roberts [this message]
2016-06-06 10:56               ` [HoTT] " Vladimir Voevodsky
2016-06-06 11:40                 ` David Roberts
2016-06-03 20:17     ` [HoTT] " Martin Escardo
     [not found] ` <CAOvivQxw34SKUatt4aW-u4bLjgSq=K58i8E6+sBBAh6OzvzANg@mail.gmail.com>
2016-06-05 20:40   ` [HoTT] " Martin Escardo
     [not found]     ` <CAOvivQx0BHg2KCbWzav+0aW9knbEq521gxXBA3pDrFDxt8J0qA@mail.gmail.com>
2016-06-08 10:14       ` Martín Hötzel Escardó
2016-06-14 21:46         ` Michael Shulman
2016-06-14 22:15           ` Martin Escardo
2016-06-14 22:30             ` Michael Shulman
2016-06-14 23:33               ` Martin Escardo
2016-06-15  3:04                 ` Michael Shulman
2016-06-08 14:37       ` Fwd: " 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=CAFL+ZM8zEAfe4Aq0Mq7tsbUTz6yFqAaTiNzetANE7W3pE+8mjQ@mail.gmail.com \
    --to="drobert..."@gmail.com \
    --cc="andrew...."@gmail.com \
    --cc="homotopyt..."@googlegroups.com \
    --cc="m.es..."@cs.bham.ac.uk \
    --cc="urs.sc..."@googlemail.com \
    --cc="vlad..."@ias.edu \
    /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).