Talk:Triangulated category
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
|||||
| Mathematics grading: | B Class | Low Importance | Field: Foundations, logic, and set theory | ||
under the section Introduction, you write "..was introduced in his thesis by Verdier, based on some ideas of Grothendieck." I would prefer "the ideas of grothendieck" instead. marhahs,17sep2006
- Well, OK. It's not a big issue.Charles Matthews 14:04, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
- i mentioned that because it was more correct andnot only a matter of taste. i change it. marhahs,19sep2006
[edit] Homotopy category
I would create an own site for the homotopy category. Seems enough material and now the information is partly in chain homotopy, partly in this article, and also in derived category. OK? Jakob.scholbach 04:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
- Well, for one thing the reference to homotopy category in this article looks incorrect because the suspension functor is not an auto-equivalence in this category; shouldn't it point to stable homotopy theory (of spectra, possibly) instead? - Saibod 19:17, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- He meant the homotopy category of chain complexes, not the homotopy category. You are referring to the link in the intro? If you know enough to say whether the link is wrong you should fix it; I don't. Ryan Reich 19:46, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
