13 Jun 2021 |

| @ruv:matrix.org left the room. | 22:19:13 |

18 Jun 2021 |

| i_aspie joined the room. | 07:00:35 |

19 Jun 2021 |

| ms changed their display name from stock to ms. | 22:41:35 |

30 Jun 2021 |

| syneevoinfinity2 joined the room. | 10:59:41 |

5 Jul 2021 |

| ryan changed their display name from Ryan to ryan. | 15:23:26 |

8 Jul 2021 |

| SoulMakossa joined the room. | 06:11:38 |

| monad joined the room. | 23:23:33 |

| monad changed their display name from Stephen to monad. | 23:25:13 |

9 Jul 2021 |

| @rescogitans:matrix.org joined the room. | 00:16:57 |

| SoulMakossa changed their display name from terrierex to SoulMakossa. | 03:51:20 |

Sean Tilson | I think SW duality is best understood from the perspective of spectra. The fact that there is a space level model is pretty crazy. But I think one sees relatively quickly that it can be a bit hard to define. But now I see why you are mentioning SW duality. things move so slow here I forgot about the earlier conversation. | 17:49:02 |

Sean Tilson | But I am biased. | 17:49:13 |

Sean Tilson | Redacted or Malformed Event | 17:49:22 |

Sean Tilson | The pair A\times A' inside B \times B has the property that if you pull it back along the diagonal B \to B \times B you get the empty set, because this models the intersection. | 17:50:31 |

Sean Tilson | I think the only kind of universal property you will end up getting is what you would expect given that A' is the complement of A in B. | 17:51:01 |

Sean Tilson | In reply to @joel135:matrix.org Maybe this is related to my previous question. I didn't dive deep into SW duality. * I think SW duality is best understood from the perspective of spectra. The fact that there is a space level model is pretty crazy. But I think one sees relatively quickly that it can be a bit hard to define. But now I see why you are mentioning SW duality. things move so slow here I forgot about the earlier conversation. | 17:52:52 |

Sean Tilson | Joel Sjögren: do you have a particular interest in Alexander Cech duality? Or is there some geometry you want to do? Or are you learning for fun? I just ask because if you are learning for fun, a friend of mine is posting some videos on youtube that I think are quite good, but they come after a couple semesters of Algebraic topology. | 18:02:23 |

Sean Tilson | Also, I just found that Borcherds has been uploading lectures to youtube. I have liked what I have seen so far and he does have a course on Algebraic Topology. | 18:02:53 |

10 Jul 2021 |

| moral28 joined the room. | 19:24:16 |

11 Jul 2021 |

| @werebear:matrix.org left the room. | 20:19:30 |

12 Jul 2021 |

| nhum joined the room. | 03:14:07 |

16 Jul 2021 |

| @navitux:matrix.org left the room. | 18:13:59 |

20 Jul 2021 |

| @rescogitans:matrix.org left the room. | 04:42:38 |

22 Jul 2021 |

| jds joined the room. | 22:08:05 |

26 Jul 2021 |

| c3y joined the room. | 19:26:37 |

28 Jul 2021 |

Joel Sjögren | In reply to @smtilson:matrix.org Joel Sjögren: do you have a particular interest in Alexander Cech duality? Or is there some geometry you want to do? Or are you learning for fun? I just ask because if you are learning for fun, a friend of mine is posting some videos on youtube that I think are quite good, but they come after a couple semesters of Algebraic topology. I am thinking about logical negation, which is related to duality or adjointness by the identity rules of Girard's proof nets. So I am interested in all dualities, you could say. But in particular I am looking at how to model space with string diagrams for n-categories and the operations you can apply to such models, some of which are involutions or approximately involutions, and I am sometimes trying to match these with known instances of duality in geometry/topology. | 06:22:40 |

Joel Sjögren | If you tell me what the videos are I'll bookmark them 🙂 | 06:23:39 |

30 Jul 2021 |

| 27182818284tropy joined the room. | 00:41:23 |

| @p4amtrx:matrix.org joined the room. | 15:02:49 |

2 Aug 2021 |

| @p4amtrx:matrix.org left the room. | 08:26:28 |