$\Newextarrow{\xRightarrow}{5,5}{0x21D2}$ $\newcommand\empty{}$

Comments on Remark

Go back to the page of Remark

Comment #32 by Daniel on

[Typo:] "... then the evaluation of on the morphism determines a map ..."

Comment #33 by Daniel on

[Typo:] "Notation For every nonnegative integer and every integer with , we let denote the function given by the formula ..."

Comment #34 by Daniel on

[Typo:] "Remark ... we have canonical bijections ."

Comment #44 by Kerodon on

Yep; thanks for these!

Comment #54 by Robert on

There is an extra parenthesis in the second equation, right after the :

Comment #95 by Eugene on

Notation seem to exclude . Am I missing something?

Comment #97 by Kerodon on

Whoops. Yes, the scope of the definition should include [0].

Comment #269 by Dominic Fox on

It's not clear to me whether Δ should include [0], since it is said to be equivalent to the category of non-empty finite linearly-ordered sets, and [0] is presumably empty.

Comment #270 by John Boger on

OK, I like the idea of a new foundation for mathematics -- I'd found set theory to be a bit lacking as a basis -- but now I'm completely lost from the word go. Can someone recommend prerequisite reading on category theory? I'm not even sure I fully understand what a "category"' means generally in mathematics, let alone thse infinity categories, and I certainly don't understand some of the other terms being used.

Comment #271 by Kerodon on

[0] denotes the set {0}, which has one element.

Comment #1348 by David Karapetyan on

"Can someone recommend prerequisite reading on category theory?"

There are several books for beginners. The ones I like are and

Comment #1977 by Justin Hilburn on

Typo: On the RHS of equation (1.10) in the proof of Proposition the upper and lower indices are swapped.

Comment #1979 by Kerodon on

Yep; thanks!

Comment #2011 by Kaiyan Wu on

Typo: It seems that equation (1.3) have the upper and lower indices swapped.

Comment #2026 by Kerodon on

Yep. Thanks!

Comment #2133 by Genki Sato on

It looks like there are two Section 1.1.1's: this one and Subsection 04ZB. Is this intentional?

Comment #2134 by Kerodon on

Not sure what the issue is there; the replication doesn't appear in the pdf.

Post a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked.

In your comment you can use Markdown and LaTeX style mathematics (enclose it like $\pi$). A preview option is available if you wish to see how it works out (just click on the eye in the toolbar).

Unfortunately JavaScript is disabled in your browser, so the comment preview function will not work.

In order to prevent bots from posting comments, we would like you to prove that you are human. You can do this by filling in the name of the current tag in the following input field. As a reminder, this is tag 0008. The letter 'O' is never used.