Jump to content

Homotopy hypothesis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In category theory, a branch of mathematics, Grothendieck's homotopy hypothesis states, homotopy theory speaking, that the ∞-groupoids are spaces.

One version of the hypothesis was claimed to be proved in the 1991 paper by Kapranov and Voevodsky.[1] Their proof turned out to be flawed and their result in the form interpreted by Carlos Simpson is now known as the Simpson conjecture.[2]

In higher category theory, one considers a space-valued presheaf instead of a set-valued presheaf in ordinary category theory. In view of homotopy hypothesis, a space here can be taken to an ∞-groupoid.

Formulations

[edit]

A precise formulation of the hypothesis very strongly depends on the definition of an ∞-groupoid. One definition is that, mimicking the ordinary category case, an ∞-groupoid is an ∞-category in which each morphism is invertible or equivalently its homotopy category is a groupoid.

Now, if an ∞-category is defined as a simplicial set satisfying the weak Kan condition, as done commonly today, then ∞-groupoids amounts exactly to Kan complexes (= simplicial sets with the Kan condition) by the following argument. If is a Kan complex (viewed as an ∞-category) and a morphism in it, consider from the horn such that . By the Kan condition, extends to and the image is a left inverse of . Similarly, has a right inverse and so is invertible. The converse, that an ∞-groupoid is a Kan complex, is less trivial and is due to Joyal. [3]

Because of the above fact, it is common to define ∞-groupoids simply as Kan complexes. Now, a theorem of Milnor says that Kan complexes completely determine the homotopy theory of (reasonable) topological spaces. So, this essentially proves the hypothesis. In particular, if ∞-groupoids are defined as Kan complexes (bypassing Joyal’s result), then the hypothesis is almost trivial.

However, if an ∞-groupoid is defined in different ways, then the hypothesis is usually still open. In particular, the hypothesis with Grothendieck's original definition of an ∞-groupoid is still open.

n-version

[edit]

There is also a version of homotopy hypothesis for n-groupoids, which roughly says[4]

Homotopy hypothesisAn n-groupoid is exactly the same as a homotopy n-type.

The statement requires several clarifications:

  • An n-groupoid is typically defined as an n-category where each morphism is invertible. So, in particular, the meaning depends on the meaning of an n-category (e.g., usually some weak version of an n-category),
  • "the same as" usually means some equivalence (not necessarily strong), and the definition of an equivalence typically uses some higher notions like an ∞-category,
  • A homotopy n-type means a reasonable topological space with vanishing i-th homotopy groups, i > n at each base point.

This version is still open.[citation needed]

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]
  1. ^ Kapranov, M. M.; Voevodsky, V. A. (1991). "-groupoids and homotopy types". Cahiers de Topologie et Géométrie Différentielle Catégoriques. 32 (1): 29–46. ISSN 1245-530X.
  2. ^ Simpson, Carlos (1998). "Homotopy types of strict 3-groupoids". arXiv:math/9810059.
  3. ^ (Land 2021, 2.1 Joyal’s Special Horn Lifting Theorem, Corollary 2.1.12)
  4. ^ Baez & Shulman 2010, § 2.3.

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
  • Ayala, David; Francis, John; Rozenblyum, Nick (2018). "A stratified homotopy hypothesis". Journal of the European Mathematical Society. 21 (4): 1071–1178. arXiv:1502.01713. doi:10.4171/JEMS/856.
[edit]