# HG changeset patch # User Scott Morrison # Date 1291145606 28800 # Node ID 3f0f4f4ad048675949830e88c913710677f71561 # Parent 6088d0b8611bb2fa04da181d2daf02d75435bfa5 preferring pivotal over 'strong duality'. may want to search for 'duality' and think about phrasing... diff -r 6088d0b8611b -r 3f0f4f4ad048 pnas/pnas.tex --- a/pnas/pnas.tex Tue Nov 30 11:30:33 2010 -0800 +++ b/pnas/pnas.tex Tue Nov 30 11:33:26 2010 -0800 @@ -295,7 +295,7 @@ {\it strictly associative} composition $\Omega_r\times \Omega_s\to \Omega_{r+s}$. Thus we can have the simplicity of strict associativity in exchange for more morphisms. We wish to imitate this strategy in higher categories. -Because we are mainly interested in the case of strong duality, we replace the intervals $[0,r]$ not with +Because we are mainly interested in the case of pivotal $n$-categories, we replace the intervals $[0,r]$ not with a product of $k$ intervals (c.f. \cite{ulrike-tillmann-2008,0909.2212}) but rather with any $k$-ball, that is, any $k$-manifold which is homeomorphic to the standard $k$-ball $B^k$. @@ -316,7 +316,7 @@ Note that the functoriality in the above axiom allows us to operate via homeomorphisms which are not the identity on the boundary of the $k$-ball. -The action of these homeomorphisms gives the ``strong duality" structure. +The action of these homeomorphisms gives the pivotal structure. For this reason we don't subdivide the boundary of a morphism into domain and range in the next axiom --- the duality operations can convert between domain and range. @@ -504,7 +504,7 @@ \subsection{Example (string diagrams)} \mbox{} -Fix a ``traditional" $n$-category $C$ with strong duality (e.g.\ a pivotal 2-category). +Fix a ``traditional" pivotal $n$-category $C$ (e.g.\ a pivotal 2-category). Let $X$ be a $k$-ball and define $\cS_C(X)$ to be the set of $C$ string diagrams drawn on $X$; that is, certain cell complexes embedded in $X$, with the codimension-$j$ cells labeled by $j$-morphisms of $C$. If $X$ is an $n$-ball, identify two such string diagrams if they evaluate to the same $n$-morphism of $C$.