-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 23
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Theorem 3.1.2 #153
Comments
Ooops, thanks @benediktahrens . |
Commit a39baad addresses this. |
There's one more issue with the proof -- the last paragraph introduces p and q again, but doesn't use them. |
The last paragraph uses the more general result from the previous paragraph that takes p : f(∙) = g(∙) and q : f(loop) = p⁻¹ · g(loop) · p and produces an identification of f and g. So the last paragraph explains which p and q to use so that this applies to ve(ev(f)) and f. |
I have a problem finding a place I can talk that still has passable wifi (my office mate is unfortunately not gone yet) so don't wait for me and excuse me if I come and go. I only have some thought on some proofs to share today.
Bjorn
On 9 Sep 2022, at 15:59, Ulrik Buchholtz ***@***.***> wrote:
The last paragraph uses the more general result from the previous paragraph that takes p : f(∙) = g(∙) and q : f(loop) = p⁻¹ · g(loop) · p and produces an identification of f and g. So the last paragraph explains which p and q to use so that this applies to ve(ev(f)) and f.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#153 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AKO2SK4NMBMODWGWRULYJ2TV5M7EJANCNFSM6AAAAAAQH3DGZM>.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
Hi,
it turns out that many have a problem with meeting Thursday September 29. I propose we skip this meeting.
Best,
Bjorn
… On Sep 22, 2022, at 16:13, Bjørn Ian Dundas ***@***.***> wrote:
I have a problem finding a place I can talk that still has passable wifi (my office mate is unfortunately not gone yet) so don't wait for me and excuse me if I come and go. I only have some thought on some proofs to share today.
Bjorn
> On 9 Sep 2022, at 15:59, Ulrik Buchholtz ***@***.***> wrote:
>
>
>
> The last paragraph uses the more general result from the previous paragraph that takes p : f(∙) = g(∙) and q : f(loop) = p⁻¹ · g(loop) · p and produces an identification of f and g. So the last paragraph explains which p and q to use so that this applies to ve(ev(f)) and f.
>
> —
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
>
|
Sounds good to me.
|
So, are we skipping tomorrow's meeting? |
Yes, I think so too.
Bjorn
On 28 Sep 2022, at 18:41, Daniel R. Grayson ***@***.***> wrote:
So, are we skipping tomorrow's meeting?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#153 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AKO2SKZLXLZN7OM3M6AZIYDWARYMXANCNFSM6AAAAAAQH3DGZM>.
You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
Lots of rephrasing needed here.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: