--- a/blob1.tex	Sun Nov 01 20:29:33 2009 +0000
+++ b/blob1.tex	Sun Nov 01 20:29:41 2009 +0000
@@ -36,14 +36,9 @@
 \begin{itemize}
 \item Some sections are missing.
 \item Many sections are incomplete.
-In some cases the incompleteness is noted, in some cases not.
-\item Some sections have been rewritten, but the older, obsolete version of
-the section has not been deleted yet.
+In most cases the incompleteness is noted, but occasionally it isn't.
 \item Some sections were written nearly two years ago, and are now outdated.
-\item Some sections have not been proof-read.
 \item There are not yet enough citations to similar work of other people.
-\item Due to multiple authors and multiple, disconnected episodes of writing,
-the various parts do not cohere as well as they should. 
 \end{itemize}
 Despite all this, there's probably enough decipherable material
 here to interest the motivated reader.

--- a/preamble.tex	Sun Nov 01 20:29:33 2009 +0000
+++ b/preamble.tex	Sun Nov 01 20:29:41 2009 +0000
@@ -51,6 +51,7 @@
 \newcommand{\doi}[1]{\href{http://dx.doi.org/#1}{{\tt DOI:#1}}}
 \newcommand{\euclid}[1]{\href{http://projecteuclid.org/euclid.cmp/#1}{{\tt at Project Euclid: #1}}}
 \newcommand{\mathscinet}[1]{\href{http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=#1}{\tt #1}}
+\newcommand{\googlebooks}[1]{(preview at \href{http://books.google.com/books?id=#1}{google books})}
 
 
 % THEOREMS -------------------------------------------------------
@@ -179,6 +180,7 @@
 
 \newcommand{\CM}[2]{C_*(\Maps(#1 \to #2))}
 \newcommand{\CD}[1]{C_*(\Diff(#1))}
+\newcommand{\CH}[1]{C_*(\Homeo(#1))}
 
 \newcommand{\directSumStack}[2]{{\begin{matrix}#1 \\ \DirectSum \\#2\end{matrix}}}
 \newcommand{\directSumStackThree}[3]{{\begin{matrix}#1 \\ \DirectSum \\#2 \\ \DirectSum \\#3\end{matrix}}}

--- a/text/comm_alg.tex	Sun Nov 01 20:29:33 2009 +0000
+++ b/text/comm_alg.tex	Sun Nov 01 20:29:41 2009 +0000
@@ -112,8 +112,8 @@
 \nn{probably should put a more precise statement about cyclic homology and $S^1$ actions in the Hochschild section}
 Let us check this directly.
 
-According to \nn{Loday, 3.2.2}, $HH_i(k[t]) \cong k[t]$ for $i=0,1$ and is zero for $i\ge 2$.
-\nn{say something about $t$-degree?  is this in [Loday]?}
+According to \cite[3.2.2]{MR1600246}, $HH_i(k[t]) \cong k[t]$ for $i=0,1$ and is zero for $i\ge 2$.
+\nn{say something about $t$-degree?  is this in Loday?}
 
 We can define a flow on $\Sigma^j(S^1)$ by having the points repel each other.
 The fixed points of this flow are the equally spaced configurations.
@@ -135,7 +135,7 @@
 0, $\z/j \z$ in odd degrees, and 0 in positive even degrees.
 The point $\Sigma^0(S^1)$ contributes the homology of $BS^1$ which is $\z$ in even 
 degrees and 0 in odd degrees.
-This agrees with the calculation in \nn{Loday, 3.1.7}.
+This agrees with the calculation in \cite[3.1.7]{MR1600246}.
 
 \medskip
 
@@ -150,7 +150,7 @@
 $\bc_*(M, k[t_1, \ldots, t_m])$ is homotopy equivalent to $C_*(\Sigma_m^\infty(M), k)$.
 \end{prop}
 
-According to \nn{Loday, 3.2.2},
+According to \cite[3.2.2]{MR1600246},
 \[
 	HH_n(k[t_1, \ldots, t_m]) \cong \Lambda^n(k^m) \otimes k[t_1, \ldots, t_m] .
 \]
@@ -186,7 +186,7 @@
 
 Still to do:
 \begin{itemize}
-\item compare the topological computation for truncated polynomial algebra with [Loday]
+\item compare the topological computation for truncated polynomial algebra with \cite{MR1600246}
 \item multivariable truncated polynomial algebras (at least mention them)
 \item ideally, say something more about higher hochschild homology (maybe sketch idea for proof of equivalence)
 \end{itemize}

--- a/text/definitions.tex	Sun Nov 01 20:29:33 2009 +0000
+++ b/text/definitions.tex	Sun Nov 01 20:29:41 2009 +0000
@@ -27,8 +27,6 @@
 is a collection of functors $\cC_k : \cM_k \to \Set$ for $0 \leq k \leq n$
 together with some additional data and satisfying some additional conditions, all specified below.
 
-\nn{refer somewhere to my TQFT notes \cite{kw:tqft}}
-
 Before finishing the definition of fields, we give two motivating examples
 (actually, families of examples) of systems of fields.
 
@@ -390,7 +388,7 @@
 \end{itemize}
 (See Figure \ref{blob1diagram}.)
 \begin{figure}[!ht]\begin{equation*}
-\mathfig{.9}{tempkw/blob1diagram}
+\mathfig{.9}{definition/single-blob}
 \end{equation*}\caption{A 1-blob diagram.}\label{blob1diagram}\end{figure}
 In order to get the linear structure correct, we (officially) define
 \[
@@ -423,11 +421,11 @@
 \item A pair of closed balls (blobs) $B_0, B_1 \sub X$ with disjoint interiors.
 \item A field $r \in \cC(X \setmin (B_0 \cup B_1); c_0, c_1)$
 (where $c_i \in \cC(\bd B_i)$).
-\item Local relation fields $u_i \in U(B_i; c_i)$, $i=1,2$.
+\item Local relation fields $u_i \in U(B_i; c_i)$, $i=1,2$. \nn{We're inconsistent with the indexes -- are they 0,1 or 1,2? I'd prefer 1,2.}
 \end{itemize}
 (See Figure \ref{blob2ddiagram}.)
 \begin{figure}[!ht]\begin{equation*}
-\mathfig{.9}{tempkw/blob2ddiagram}
+\mathfig{.9}{definition/disjoint-blobs}
 \end{equation*}\caption{A disjoint 2-blob diagram.}\label{blob2ddiagram}\end{figure}
 We also identify $(B_0, B_1, u_0, u_1, r)$ with $-(B_1, B_0, u_1, u_0, r)$;
 reversing the order of the blobs changes the sign.
@@ -447,7 +445,7 @@
 \end{itemize}
 (See Figure \ref{blob2ndiagram}.)
 \begin{figure}[!ht]\begin{equation*}
-\mathfig{.9}{tempkw/blob2ndiagram}
+\mathfig{.9}{definition/nested-blobs}
 \end{equation*}\caption{A nested 2-blob diagram.}\label{blob2ndiagram}\end{figure}
 Let $r = r_1 \bullet r'$, where $r_1 \in \cC(B_1 \setmin B_0; c_0, c_1)$
 (for some $c_1 \in \cC(B_1)$) and

--- a/text/intro.tex	Sun Nov 01 20:29:33 2009 +0000
+++ b/text/intro.tex	Sun Nov 01 20:29:41 2009 +0000
@@ -11,13 +11,11 @@
 on the configurations space of unlabeled points in $M$.
 %$$H_*(\bc_*(M; k[t])) = H^{\text{sing}}_*(\Delta^\infty(M), k).$$ 
 \end{itemize}
-The blob complex has good formal properties, summarized in \S \ref{sec:properties}. These include an action of $\CD{M}$, 
-\nn{maybe replace Diff with Homeo?}
-extending the usual $\Diff(M)$ action on the TQFT space $H_0$ (see Property \ref{property:evaluation}) and a gluing formula allowing calculations by cutting manifolds into smaller parts (see Property \ref{property:gluing}).
+The blob complex definition is motivated by the desire for a derived analogue of the usual TQFT Hilbert space (replacing quotient of fields by local relations with some sort of resolution), 
+and for a generalization of Hochschild homology to higher $n$-categories. We would also like to be able to talk about $\CM{M}{T}$ when $T$ is an $n$-category rather than a manifold. The blob complex allows us to do all of these! More detailed motivations are described in \S \ref{sec:motivations}.
 
-The blob complex definition is motivated by the desire for a `derived' analogue of the usual TQFT Hilbert space (replacing quotient of fields by local relations with some sort of `resolution'), 
-\nn{are the quotes around `derived' and `resolution' necessary?}
-and for a generalization of Hochschild homology to higher $n$-categories. We would also like to be able to talk about $\CM{M}{T}$ when $T$ is an $n$-category rather than a manifold. The blob complex allows us to do all of these! More detailed motivations are described in \S \ref{sec:motivations}.
+The blob complex has good formal properties, summarized in \S \ref{sec:properties}. These include an action of $\CH{M}$, 
+extending the usual $\Homeo(M)$ action on the TQFT space $H_0$ (see Property \ref{property:evaluation}) and a gluing formula allowing calculations by cutting manifolds into smaller parts (see Property \ref{property:gluing}).
 
 We expect applications of the blob complex to contact topology and Khovanov homology but do not address these in this paper. See \S \ref{sec:future} for slightly more detail.
 
@@ -29,14 +27,14 @@
 Nevertheless, when we attempt to establish all of the observed properties of the blob complex, we find this situation unsatisfactory. Thus, in the second part of the paper (section \S \ref{sec:ncats}) we pause and give yet another definition of an $n$-category, or rather a definition of an $n$-category with strong duality. (It's not clear that we could remove the duality conditions from our definition, even if we wanted to.) We call these ``topological $n$-categories'', to differentiate them from previous versions. Moreover, we find that we need analogous $A_\infty$ $n$-categories, and we define these as well following very similar axioms.
 
 \nn{Not sure that the next para is appropriate here}
-The basic idea is that each potential definition of an $n$-category makes a choice about the `shape' of morphisms. We try to be as lax as possible; a topological $n$-category associates a vector space to every $B$ diffeomorphic to the $n$-ball. This vector spaces glue together associatively. For an $A_\infty$ $n$-category, we instead associate a chain complex to each such $B$. We require that diffeomorphisms (or the complex of singular chains of diffeomorphisms in the $A_\infty$ case) act. The axioms for an $A_\infty$ $n$-category are designed to capture two main examples: the blob complexes of $n$-balls, using a topological $n$-category, and the complex $\CM{-}{X}$ of maps to a fixed target space $X$.
+The basic idea is that each potential definition of an $n$-category makes a choice about the `shape' of morphisms. We try to be as lax as possible; a topological $n$-category associates a vector space to every $B$ homeomorphic to the $n$-ball. This vector spaces glue together associatively. For an $A_\infty$ $n$-category, we instead associate a chain complex to each such $B$. We require that homeomorphisms (or the complex of singular chains of homeomorphisms in the $A_\infty$ case) act. The axioms for an $A_\infty$ $n$-category are designed to capture two main examples: the blob complexes of $n$-balls, using a topological $n$-category, and the complex $\CM{-}{X}$ of maps to a fixed target space $X$.
 \nn{we might want to make our choice of notation here ($B$, $X$) consistent with later sections ($X$, $T$), or vice versa}
 
 In  \S \ref{sec:ainfblob} we explain how to construct a system of fields from a topological $n$-category, and give an alternative definition of the blob complex for an $n$-manifold and an $A_\infty$ $n$-category. Using these definitions, we show how to use the blob complex to `resolve' any topological $n$-category as an $A_\infty$ $n$-category, and relate the first and second definitions of the blob complex. We use the blob complex for $A_\infty$ $n$-categories to establish important properties of the blob complex (in both variants), in particular the `gluing formula' of Property \ref{property:gluing} below.
 
 \nn{KW: the previous two paragraphs seem a little awkward to me, but I don't presently have a good idea for fixing them.}
 
-Finally, later sections address other topics. Section \S \ref{sec:comm_alg} describes the blob complex when $\cC$ is a commutative algebra, thought of as a topological $n$-category, in terms of the topology of $M$. Section \S \ref{sec:deligne} states (and in a later edition of this paper, hopefully proves) a generalisation of the Deligne conjecture (that the little discs operad acts on Hochschild cohomology) in terms of the blob complex. The appendixes prove technical results about $\CD{M}$, and make connections between our definitions of $n$-categories and familar definitions for $n=1$ and $n=2$, as well as relating the $n=1$ case of our $A_\infty$ $n$-categories with usual $A_\infty$ algebras.
+Finally, later sections address other topics. Section \S \ref{sec:comm_alg} describes the blob complex when $\cC$ is a commutative algebra, thought of as a topological $n$-category, in terms of the topology of $M$. Section \S \ref{sec:deligne} states (and in a later edition of this paper, hopefully proves) a generalisation of the Deligne conjecture (that the little discs operad acts on Hochschild cohomology) in terms of the blob complex. The appendixes prove technical results about $\CH{M}$, and make connections between our definitions of $n$-categories and familar definitions for $n=1$ and $n=2$, as well as relating the $n=1$ case of our $A_\infty$ $n$-categories with usual $A_\infty$ algebras.
 
 
 \nn{some more things to cover in the intro}
@@ -58,12 +56,12 @@
 in order to better integrate it into the current intro.}
 
 As a starting point, consider TQFTs constructed via fields and local relations.
-(See Section \ref{sec:tqftsviafields} or \cite{kwtqft}.)
+(See Section \ref{sec:tqftsviafields} or \cite{kw:tqft}.)
 This gives a satisfactory treatment for semisimple TQFTs
 (i.e.\ TQFTs for which the cylinder 1-category associated to an
 $n{-}1$-manifold $Y$ is semisimple for all $Y$).
 
-For non-semiemple TQFTs, this approach is less satisfactory.
+For non-semi-simple TQFTs, this approach is less satisfactory.
 Our main motivating example (though we will not develop it in this paper)
 is the (decapitated) $4{+}1$-dimensional TQFT associated to Khovanov homology.
 It associates a bigraded vector space $A_{Kh}(W^4, L)$ to a 4-manifold $W$ together
@@ -72,7 +70,7 @@
 
 How would we go about computing $A_{Kh}(W^4, L)$?
 For $A_{Kh}(B^4, L)$, the main tool is the exact triangle (long exact sequence)
-\nn{... $L_1, L_2, L_3$}.
+relating resolutions of a crossing.
 Unfortunately, the exactness breaks if we glue $B^4$ to itself and attempt
 to compute $A_{Kh}(S^1\times B^3, L)$.
 According to the gluing theorem for TQFTs-via-fields, gluing along $B^3 \subset \bd B^4$
@@ -113,7 +111,7 @@
 and so on.
 
 None of the above ideas depend on the details of the Khovanov homology example,
-so we develop the general theory in the paper and postpone specific applications
+so we develop the general theory in this paper and postpone specific applications
 to later papers.
 
 
@@ -186,22 +184,22 @@
 \end{equation*}
 \end{property}
 
-Here $\CD{X}$ is the singular chain complex of the space of diffeomorphisms of $X$, fixed on $\bdy X$.
-\begin{property}[$C_*(\Diff(-))$ action]
+Here $\CH{X}$ is the singular chain complex of the space of homeomorphisms of $X$, fixed on $\bdy X$.
+\begin{property}[$C_*(\Homeo(-))$ action]
 \label{property:evaluation}%
 There is a chain map
 \begin{equation*}
-\ev_X: \CD{X} \tensor \bc_*(X) \to \bc_*(X).
+\ev_X: \CH{X} \tensor \bc_*(X) \to \bc_*(X).
 \end{equation*}
 
-Restricted to $C_0(\Diff(X))$ this is just the action of diffeomorphisms described in Property \ref{property:functoriality}. Further, for
+Restricted to $C_0(\Homeo(X))$ this is just the action of homeomorphisms described in Property \ref{property:functoriality}. Further, for
 any codimension $1$-submanifold $Y \subset X$ dividing $X$ into $X_1 \cup_Y X_2$, the following diagram
 (using the gluing maps described in Property \ref{property:gluing-map}) commutes.
 \begin{equation*}
 \xymatrix{
-     \CD{X} \otimes \bc_*(X) \ar[r]^{\ev_X}    & \bc_*(X) \\
-     \CD{X_1} \otimes \CD{X_2} \otimes \bc_*(X_1) \otimes \bc_*(X_2)
-        \ar@/_4ex/[r]_{\ev_{X_1} \otimes \ev_{X_2}}  \ar[u]^{\gl^{\Diff}_Y \otimes \gl_Y}  &
+     \CH{X} \otimes \bc_*(X) \ar[r]^{\ev_X}    & \bc_*(X) \\
+     \CH{X_1} \otimes \CH{X_2} \otimes \bc_*(X_1) \otimes \bc_*(X_2)
+        \ar@/_4ex/[r]_{\ev_{X_1} \otimes \ev_{X_2}}  \ar[u]^{\gl^{\Homeo}_Y \otimes \gl_Y}  &
             \bc_*(X_1) \otimes \bc_*(X_2) \ar[u]_{\gl_Y}
 }
 \end{equation*}
@@ -212,9 +210,9 @@
 (using the gluing maps described in Property \ref{property:gluing-map}) commutes.
 \begin{equation*}
 \xymatrix@C+2cm{
-     \CD{X \bigcup_Y \selfarrow} \otimes \bc_*(X \bigcup_Y \selfarrow) \ar[r]^<<<<<<<<<<<<{\ev_{(X \bigcup_Y \scalebox{0.5}{\selfarrow})}}    & \bc_*(X \bigcup_Y \selfarrow) \\
-     \CD{X} \otimes \bc_*(X)
-        \ar[r]_{\ev_{X}}  \ar[u]^{\gl^{\Diff}_Y \otimes \gl_Y}  &
+     \CH{X \bigcup_Y \selfarrow} \otimes \bc_*(X \bigcup_Y \selfarrow) \ar[r]^<<<<<<<<<<<<{\ev_{(X \bigcup_Y \scalebox{0.5}{\selfarrow})}}    & \bc_*(X \bigcup_Y \selfarrow) \\
+     \CH{X} \otimes \bc_*(X)
+        \ar[r]_{\ev_{X}}  \ar[u]^{\gl^{\Homeo}_Y \otimes \gl_Y}  &
             \bc_*(X) \ar[u]_{\gl_Y}
 }
 \end{equation*}
@@ -240,9 +238,9 @@
 Let $A_*(Y)$ be the $A_\infty$ $k$-category associated to $Y$ via blob homology (see Property \ref{property:blobs-ainfty}).
 Then
 \[
-	\bc_*(Y^{n-k}\times W^k, \cC) \simeq \bc_*(W, A_*(Y)) .
+	\bc_*(Y\times W, \cC) \simeq \bc_*(W, A_*(Y)) .
 \]
-Note on the right here we have the version of the blob complex for $A_\infty$ $n$-categories.
+Note on the right hand side we have the version of the blob complex for $A_\infty$ $n$-categories.
 \end{property}
 It seems reasonable to expect a generalization describing an arbitrary fibre bundle. See in particular \S \ref{moddecss} for the framework as such a statement.
 
@@ -293,7 +291,7 @@
 Throughout, we have resisted the temptation to work in the greatest generality possible (don't worry, it wasn't that hard). 
 In most of the places where we say ``set" or ``vector space", any symmetric monoidal category would do.
 \nn{maybe make similar remark about chain complexes and $(\infty, 0)$-categories}
-More could be said about finite characteristic (there appears in be $2$-torsion in $\bc_1(S^2, \cC)$ for any spherical $2$-category $\cC$). Much more could be said about other types of manifolds, in particular oriented, $\operatorname{Spin}$ and $\operatorname{Pin}^{\pm}$ manifolds, where boundary issues become more complicated. (We'd recommend thinking about boundaries as germs, rather than just codimension $1$ manifolds.) We've also take the path of least resistance by considering $\operatorname{PL}$ manifolds; there may be some differences for topological manifolds and smooth manifolds.
+More could be said about finite characteristic (there appears in be $2$-torsion in $\bc_1(S^2, \cC)$ for any spherical $2$-category $\cC$, for example). Much more could be said about other types of manifolds, in particular oriented, $\operatorname{Spin}$ and $\operatorname{Pin}^{\pm}$ manifolds, where boundary issues become more complicated. (We'd recommend thinking about boundaries as germs, rather than just codimension $1$ manifolds.) We've also take the path of least resistance by considering $\operatorname{PL}$ manifolds; there may be some differences for topological manifolds and smooth manifolds.
 
 Many results in Hochschild homology can be understood `topologically' via the blob complex. For example, we expect that the shuffle product on the Hochschild homology of a commutative algebra $A$ simply corresponds to the gluing operation on $\bc_*(S^1 \times [0,1], A)$, but haven't investigated the details.