text/appendixes/comparing_defs.tex
changeset 194 8d3f0bc6a76e
parent 169 be41f435c3f3
child 201 5acfd26510c1
equal deleted inserted replaced
193:4aeb27b28d8a 194:8d3f0bc6a76e
     4 \label{sec:comparing-defs}
     4 \label{sec:comparing-defs}
     5 
     5 
     6 In this appendix we relate the ``topological" category definitions of Section \ref{sec:ncats}
     6 In this appendix we relate the ``topological" category definitions of Section \ref{sec:ncats}
     7 to more traditional definitions, for $n=1$ and 2.
     7 to more traditional definitions, for $n=1$ and 2.
     8 
     8 
     9 \subsection{Plain 1-categories}
     9 \subsection{$1$-categories over $\Set$ or $\Vect$}
    10 
    10 \label{ssec:1-cats}
    11 Given a topological 1-category $\cC$, we construct a traditional 1-category $C$.
    11 Given a topological $1$-category $\cX$ we construct a $1$-category in the conventional sense, $c(\cX)$.
    12 (This is quite straightforward, but we include the details for the sake of completeness and
    12 This construction is quite straightforward, but we include the details for the sake of completeness, because it illustrates the role of structures (e.g. orientations, spin structures, etc) on the underlying manifolds, and 
    13 to shed some light on the $n=2$ case.)
    13 to shed some light on the $n=2$ case, which we describe in \S \ref{ssec:2-cats}.
    14 
    14 
    15 Let the objects of $C$ be $C^0 \deq \cC(B^0)$ and the morphisms of $C$ be $C^1 \deq \cC(B^1)$, 
    15 Let $B^k$ denote the \emph{standard} $k$-ball.
    16 where $B^k$ denotes the standard $k$-ball.
    16 Let the objects of $c(\cX)$ be $c(\cX)^0 = \cX(B^0)$ and the morphisms of $c(\cX)$ be $c(\cX)^1 = \cX(B^1)$. The boundary and restriction maps of $\cX$ give domain and range maps from $c(\cX)^1$ to $c(\cX)^0$.
    17 The boundary and restriction maps of $\cC$ give domain and range maps from $C^1$ to $C^0$.
       
    18 
    17 
    19 Choose a homeomorphism $B^1\cup_{pt}B^1 \to B^1$.
    18 Choose a homeomorphism $B^1\cup_{pt}B^1 \to B^1$.
    20 Define composition in $C$ to be the induced map $C^1\times C^1 \to C^1$ (defined only when range and domain agree).
    19 Define composition in $c(\cX)$ to be the induced map $c(\cX)^1\times c(\cX)^1 \to c(\cX)^1$ (defined only when range and domain agree).
    21 By isotopy invariance in $\cC$, any other choice of homeomorphism gives the same composition rule.
    20 By isotopy invariance in $\cX$, any other choice of homeomorphism gives the same composition rule.
    22 Also by isotopy invariance, composition is associative.
    21 Also by isotopy invariance, composition is associative on the nose.
    23 
    22 
    24 Given $a\in C^0$, define $\id_a \deq a\times B^1$.
    23 Given $a\in c(\cX)^0$, define $\id_a \deq a\times B^1$.
    25 By extended isotopy invariance in $\cC$, this has the expected properties of an identity morphism.
    24 By extended isotopy invariance in $\cX$, this has the expected properties of an identity morphism.
    26 
    25 
    27 \nn{(slash)id seems to rendering a a boldface 1 --- is this what we want?}
    26 
    28 
    27 If the underlying manifolds for $\cX$ have further geometric structure, then we obtain certain functors. The base case is for oriented manifolds, where we obtain no extra algebraic data.
    29 \medskip
    28 
    30 
    29 For 1-categories based on unoriented manifolds (somewhat confusingly, we're thinking of being unoriented as requiring extra data beyond being oriented, namely the identification between the orientations), there is a map $*:c(\cX)^1\to c(\cX)^1$
    31 For 1-categories based on oriented manifolds, there is no additional structure.
    30 coming from $\cX$ applied to an orientation-reversing homeomorphism (unique up to isotopy) 
    32 
       
    33 For 1-categories based on unoriented manifolds, there is a map $*:C^1\to C^1$
       
    34 coming from $\cC$ applied to an orientation-reversing homeomorphism (unique up to isotopy) 
       
    35 from $B^1$ to itself.
    31 from $B^1$ to itself.
    36 Topological properties of this homeomorphism imply that 
    32 Topological properties of this homeomorphism imply that 
    37 $a^{**} = a$ (* is order 2), * reverses domain and range, and $(ab)^* = b^*a^*$
    33 $a^{**} = a$ (* is order 2), * reverses domain and range, and $(ab)^* = b^*a^*$
    38 (* is an anti-automorphism).
    34 (* is an anti-automorphism).
    39 
    35 
    40 For 1-categories based on Spin manifolds,
    36 For 1-categories based on Spin manifolds,
    41 the the nontrivial spin homeomorphism from $B^1$ to itself which covers the identity
    37 the the nontrivial spin homeomorphism from $B^1$ to itself which covers the identity
    42 gives an order 2 automorphism of $C^1$.
    38 gives an order 2 automorphism of $c(\cX)^1$.
    43 
    39 
    44 For 1-categories based on $\text{Pin}_-$ manifolds,
    40 For 1-categories based on $\text{Pin}_-$ manifolds,
    45 we have an order 4 antiautomorphism of $C^1$.
    41 we have an order 4 antiautomorphism of $c(\cX)^1$.
    46 
       
    47 For 1-categories based on $\text{Pin}_+$ manifolds,
    42 For 1-categories based on $\text{Pin}_+$ manifolds,
    48 we have an order 2 antiautomorphism and also an order 2 automorphism of $C^1$,
    43 we have an order 2 antiautomorphism and also an order 2 automorphism of $c(\cX)^1$,
    49 and these two maps commute with each other.
    44 and these two maps commute with each other.
    50 
       
    51 \nn{need to also consider automorphisms of $B^0$ / objects}
    45 \nn{need to also consider automorphisms of $B^0$ / objects}
    52 
    46 
    53 \medskip
    47 \medskip
    54 
    48 
    55 In the other direction, given a traditional 1-category $C$
    49 In the other direction, given a $1$-category $C$
    56 (with objects $C^0$ and morphisms $C^1$) we will construct a topological
    50 (with objects $C^0$ and morphisms $C^1$) we will construct a topological
    57 1-category $\cC$.
    51 $1$-category $t(C)$.
    58 
    52 
    59 If $X$ is a 0-ball (point), let $\cC(X) \deq C^0$.
    53 If $X$ is a 0-ball (point), let $t(C)(X) \deq C^0$.
    60 If $S$ is a 0-sphere, let $\cC(S) \deq C^0\times C^0$.
    54 If $S$ is a 0-sphere, let $t(C)(S) \deq C^0\times C^0$.
    61 If $X$ is a 1-ball, let $\cC(X) \deq C^1$.
    55 If $X$ is a 1-ball, let $t(C)(X) \deq C^1$.
    62 Homeomorphisms isotopic to the identity act trivially.
    56 Homeomorphisms isotopic to the identity act trivially.
    63 If $C$ has extra structure (e.g.\ it's a *-1-category), we use this structure
    57 If $C$ has extra structure (e.g.\ it's a *-1-category), we use this structure
    64 to define the action of homeomorphisms not isotopic to the identity
    58 to define the action of homeomorphisms not isotopic to the identity
    65 (and get, e.g., an unoriented topological 1-category).
    59 (and get, e.g., an unoriented topological 1-category).
    66 
    60 
    67 The domain and range maps of $C$ determine the boundary and restriction maps of $\cC$.
    61 The domain and range maps of $C$ determine the boundary and restriction maps of $t(C)$.
    68 
    62 
    69 Gluing maps for $\cC$ are determined my composition of morphisms in $C$.
    63 Gluing maps for $t(C)$ are determined by composition of morphisms in $C$.
    70 
    64 
    71 For $X$ a 0-ball, $D$ a 1-ball and $a\in \cC(X)$, define the product morphism 
    65 For $X$ a 0-ball, $D$ a 1-ball and $a\in t(C)(X)$, define the product morphism 
    72 $a\times D \deq \id_a$.
    66 $a\times D \deq \id_a$.
    73 It is not hard to verify that this has the desired properties.
    67 It is not hard to verify that this has the desired properties.
    74 
    68 
    75 \medskip
    69 \medskip
    76 
    70 
    77 The compositions of the above two ``arrows" ($\cC\to C\to \cC$ and $C\to \cC\to C$) give back 
    71 The compositions of the constructions above, $$\cX\to c(\cX)\to t(c(\cX))$$ and $$C\to t(C)\to c(t(C)),$$ give back 
    78 more or less exactly the same thing we started with.  
    72 more or less exactly the same thing we started with.  
    79 \nn{need better notation here}
    73 
    80 As we will see below, for $n>1$ the compositions yield a weaker sort of equivalence.
    74 As we will see below, for $n>1$ the compositions yield a weaker sort of equivalence.
    81 
    75 
    82 \medskip
    76 \medskip
    83 
    77 
    84 Similar arguments show that modules for topological 1-categories are essentially
    78 Similar arguments show that modules for topological 1-categories are essentially
    85 the same thing as traditional modules for traditional 1-categories.
    79 the same thing as traditional modules for traditional 1-categories.
    86 
    80 
    87 \subsection{Plain 2-categories}
    81 \subsection{Plain 2-categories}
    88 
    82 \label{ssec:2-cats}
    89 Let $\cC$ be a topological 2-category.
    83 Let $\cC$ be a topological 2-category.
    90 We will construct a traditional pivotal 2-category.
    84 We will construct a traditional pivotal 2-category.
    91 (The ``pivotal" corresponds to our assumption of strong duality for $\cC$.)
    85 (The ``pivotal" corresponds to our assumption of strong duality for $\cC$.)
    92 
    86 
    93 We will try to describe the construction in such a way the the generalization to $n>2$ is clear,
    87 We will try to describe the construction in such a way the the generalization to $n>2$ is clear,
   189 \hrule
   183 \hrule
   190 \medskip
   184 \medskip
   191 
   185 
   192 \nn{to be continued...}
   186 \nn{to be continued...}
   193 \medskip
   187 \medskip
       
   188 
       
   189 \subsection{$A_\infty$ $1$-categories}
       
   190 \label{sec:comparing-A-infty}
       
   191 In this section, we make contact between the usual definition of an $A_\infty$ algebra and our definition of a topological $A_\infty$ algebra, from Definition \ref{defn:topological-Ainfty-category}.
       
   192 
       
   193 We begin be restricting the data of a topological $A_\infty$ algebra to the standard interval $[0,1]$, which we can alternatively characterise as:
       
   194 \begin{defn}
       
   195 A \emph{topological $A_\infty$ category on $[0,1]$} $\cC$ has a set of objects $\Obj(\cC)$, and for each $a,b \in \Obj(\cC)$, a chain complex $\cC_{a,b}$, along with
       
   196 \begin{itemize}
       
   197 \item an action of the operad of $\Obj(\cC)$-labeled cell decompositions
       
   198 \item and a compatible action of $\CD{[0,1]}$.
       
   199 \end{itemize}
       
   200 \end{defn}
       
   201 Here the operad of cell decompositions of $[0,1]$ has operations indexed by a finite set of points $0 < x_1< \cdots < x_k < 1$, cutting $[0,1]$ into subintervals. An $X$-labeled cell decomposition labels $\{0, x_1, \ldots, x_k, 1\}$ by $X$. Given two cell decompositions $\cJ^{(1)}$ and $\cJ^{(2)}$, and an index $m$, we can compose them to form a new cell decomposition $\cJ^{(1)} \circ_m \cJ^{(2)}$ by inserting the points of $\cJ^{(2)}$ linearly into the $m$-th interval of $\cJ^{(1)}$. In the $X$-labeled case, we insist that the appropriate labels match up. Saying we have an action of this operad means that for each labeled cell decomposition $0 < x_1< \cdots < x_k < 1$, $a_0, \ldots, a_{k+1} \subset \Obj(\cC)$, there is a chain map $$\cC_{a_0,a_1} \tensor \cdots \tensor \cC_{a_k,a_{k+1}} \to \cC(a_0,a_{k+1})$$ and these chain maps compose exactly as the cell decompositions.
       
   202 An action of $\CD{[0,1]}$ is compatible with an action of the cell decomposition operad if given a decomposition $\pi$, and a family of diffeomorphisms $f \in \CD{[0,1]}$ which is supported on the subintervals determined by $\pi$, then the two possible operations (glue intervals together, then apply the diffeomorphisms, or apply the diffeormorphisms separately to the subintervals, then glue) commute (as usual, up to a weakly unique homotopy).
       
   203 
       
   204 Translating between this notion and the usual definition of an $A_\infty$ category is now straightforward. To restrict to the standard interval, define $\cC_{a,b} = \cC([0,1];a,b)$. Given a cell decomposition $0 < x_1< \cdots < x_k < 1$, we use the map (suppressing labels)
       
   205 $$\cC([0,1])^{\tensor k+1} \to \cC([0,x_1]) \tensor \cdots \tensor \cC[x_k,1] \to \cC([0,1])$$
       
   206 where the factors of the first map are induced by the linear isometries $[0,1] \to [x_i, x_{i+1}]$, and the second map is just gluing. The action of $\CD{[0,1]}$ carries across, and is automatically compatible. Going the other way, we just declare $\cC(J;a,b) = \cC_{a,b}$, pick a diffeomorphism $\phi_J : J \isoto [0,1]$ for every interval $J$, define the gluing map $\cC(J_1) \tensor \cC(J_2) \to \cC(J_1 \cup J_2)$ by the first applying the cell decomposition map for $0 < \frac{1}{2} < 1$, then the self-diffeomorphism of $[0,1]$ given by $\frac{1}{2} (\phi_{J_1} \cup (1+ \phi_{J_2})) \circ \phi_{J_1 \cup J_2}^{-1}$. You can readily check that this gluing map is associative on the nose. \todo{really?}
       
   207 
       
   208 %First recall the \emph{coloured little intervals operad}. Given a set of labels $\cL$, the operations are indexed by \emph{decompositions of the interval}, each of which is a collection of disjoint subintervals $\{(a_i,b_i)\}_{i=1}^k$ of $[0,1]$, along with a labeling of the complementary regions by $\cL$, $\{l_0, \ldots, l_k\}$.  Given two decompositions $\cJ^{(1)}$ and $\cJ^{(2)}$, and an index $m$ such that $l^{(1)}_{m-1} = l^{(2)}_0$ and $l^{(1)}_{m} = l^{(2)}_{k^{(2)}}$, we can form a new decomposition by inserting the intervals of $\cJ^{(2)}$ linearly inside the $m$-th interval of $\cJ^{(1)}$. We call the resulting decomposition $\cJ^{(1)} \circ_m \cJ^{(2)}$.
       
   209 
       
   210 %\begin{defn}
       
   211 %A \emph{topological $A_\infty$ category} $\cC$ has a set of objects $\Obj(\cC)$ and for each $a,b \in \Obj(\cC)$ a chain complex $\cC_{a,b}$, along with a compatible `composition map' and an `action of families of diffeomorphisms'.
       
   212 
       
   213 %A \emph{composition map} $f$ is a family of chain maps, one for each decomposition of the interval, $f_\cJ : A^{\tensor k} \to A$, making $\cC$ into a category over the coloured little intervals operad, with labels $\cL = \Obj(\cC)$. Thus the chain maps satisfy the identity 
       
   214 %\begin{equation*}
       
   215 %f_{\cJ^{(1)} \circ_m \cJ^{(2)}} = f_{\cJ^{(1)}} \circ (\id^{\tensor m-1} \tensor f_{\cJ^{(2)}} \tensor \id^{\tensor k^{(1)} - m}).
       
   216 %\end{equation*}
       
   217 
       
   218 %An \emph{action of families of diffeomorphisms} is a chain map $ev: \CD{[0,1]} \tensor A \to A$, such that 
       
   219 %\begin{enumerate}
       
   220 %\item The diagram 
       
   221 %\begin{equation*}
       
   222 %\xymatrix{
       
   223 %\CD{[0,1]} \tensor \CD{[0,1]} \tensor A \ar[r]^{\id \tensor ev} \ar[d]^{\circ \tensor \id} & \CD{[0,1]} \tensor A \ar[d]^{ev} \\
       
   224 %\CD{[0,1]} \tensor A \ar[r]^{ev} & A
       
   225 %}
       
   226 %\end{equation*}
       
   227 %commutes up to weakly unique homotopy.
       
   228 %\item If $\phi \in \Diff([0,1])$ and $\cJ$ is a decomposition of the interval, we obtain a new decomposition $\phi(\cJ)$ and a collection $\phi_m \in \Diff([0,1])$ of diffeomorphisms obtained by taking the restrictions $\restrict{\phi}{[a_m,b_m]} : [a_m,b_m] \to [\phi(a_m),\phi(b_m)]$ and pre- and post-composing these with the linear diffeomorphisms $[0,1] \to [a_m,b_m]$ and $[\phi(a_m),\phi(b_m)] \to [0,1]$. We require that
       
   229 %\begin{equation*}
       
   230 %\phi(f_\cJ(a_1, \cdots, a_k)) = f_{\phi(\cJ)}(\phi_1(a_1), \cdots, \phi_k(a_k)).
       
   231 %\end{equation*}
       
   232 %\end{enumerate}
       
   233 %\end{defn}
       
   234 
       
   235 From a topological $A_\infty$ category on $[0,1]$ $\cC$ we can produce a `conventional' $A_\infty$ category $(A, \{m_k\})$ as defined in, for example, \cite{MR1854636}. We'll just describe the algebra case (that is, a category with only one object), as the modifications required to deal with multiple objects are trivial. Define $A = \cC$ as a chain complex (so $m_1 = d$). Define $m_2 : A\tensor A \to A$ by $f_{\{(0,\frac{1}{2}),(\frac{1}{2},1)\}}$. To define $m_3$, we begin by taking the one parameter family $\phi_3$ of diffeomorphisms of $[0,1]$ that interpolates linearly between the identity and the piecewise linear diffeomorphism taking $\frac{1}{4}$ to $\frac{1}{2}$ and $\frac{1}{2}$ to $\frac{3}{4}$, and then define
       
   236 \begin{equation*}
       
   237 m_3(a,b,c) = ev(\phi_3, m_2(m_2(a,b), c)).
       
   238 \end{equation*}
       
   239 
       
   240 It's then easy to calculate that
       
   241 \begin{align*}
       
   242 d(m_3(a,b,c)) & = ev(d \phi_3, m_2(m_2(a,b),c)) - ev(\phi_3 d m_2(m_2(a,b), c)) \\
       
   243  & = ev( \phi_3(1), m_2(m_2(a,b),c)) - ev(\phi_3(0), m_2 (m_2(a,b),c)) - \\ & \qquad - ev(\phi_3, m_2(m_2(da, b), c) + (-1)^{\deg a} m_2(m_2(a, db), c) + \\ & \qquad \quad + (-1)^{\deg a+\deg b} m_2(m_2(a, b), dc) \\
       
   244  & = m_2(a , m_2(b,c)) - m_2(m_2(a,b),c) - \\ & \qquad - m_3(da,b,c) + (-1)^{\deg a + 1} m_3(a,db,c) + \\ & \qquad \quad + (-1)^{\deg a + \deg b + 1} m_3(a,b,dc), \\
       
   245 \intertext{and thus that}
       
   246 m_1 \circ m_3 & =  m_2 \circ (\id \tensor m_2) - m_2 \circ (m_2 \tensor \id) - \\ & \qquad - m_3 \circ (m_1 \tensor \id \tensor \id) - m_3 \circ (\id \tensor m_1 \tensor \id) - m_3 \circ (\id \tensor \id \tensor m_1)
       
   247 \end{align*}
       
   248 as required (c.f. \cite[p. 6]{MR1854636}).
       
   249 \todo{then the general case.}
       
   250 We won't describe a reverse construction (producing a topological $A_\infty$ category from a `conventional' $A_\infty$ category), but we presume that this will be easy for the experts.