Our Raison D’être
Posted by David Corfield
Marni Sheppeard reports from the AustMS2006 conference, which, as anyone who knows about Australian mathematics might expect, is holding a category theory session. Dominic Verity is giving one of the talks, in which he considers the raison d’être for higher category theory, and so by extension that of the Café. Of course, we also come here for the coffee.
Posted at September 26, 2006 1:51 PM UTC
Re: Our Raison D’être
Dominic Verity wrote:
What would you all understand under “non-abelian”?
Am I mislead if I feel that if “non-abelian” cohomology is the raison d’être of anything, then of higher groupoid theory (only)?
I have never seen a general definition: “non-abelian cohomology is…”, but all the examples I know are of the form:
By removing the requirement that be a 1- and be an -groupoid (in some weak sense), we can get something even more general, which I wouldn’t in general compare to “abelian” anymore.
Also, is the idea really that the concept is the raison d’être of category theory? Or is my concept of non-abelian cohomology above too narrow-minded?