In article <73r8q7$...@gap.cco.caltech.edu>,
Toby Bartels <t...@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote:He'd darn well BETTER agree with it, because I learned everything
>james dolan <jdo...@math.ucr.edu> wrote:
>>A "groupoid" is a category where all the morphisms are
>>invertible. it may very well be interesting to generalize the
>>subject matter of this discussion to the case where c and d are
>>not necessarily groupoids, but to keep things simple for now i
>>won't do that in this post.
>You seem to agree with John Baez's classification,
>but he doesn't feel the need to limit to groupoids;
>perhaps a word on how you think that complicates things?
>Or is it just that groupoids are needed for the deep homotopy connection?
I said from him!
In all the examples I know, James' definition of "structure"
But he's back in Riverside now so I should ask him.
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.