Hostname: page-component-f554764f5-sl7kg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-10T08:03:25.865Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Morita equivalence for continuous groups

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2008

Ieke Moerdijk
Ieke Moerdijk
Affiliation:
Mathematical Institute, University of Amsterdam
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This paper is essentially concerned with the following problem. Let G be a topological group. AG-set is a set S equipped with a continuous action (where S is given the discrete topology). These G-sets form a category BG. It is well known that if G and H are discrete groups, BG is equivalent to BH iff G is isomorphic to H. However, this result cannot be extended much beyond the discrete case. The problem is: when is BG equivalent to BH, for topological groups G and H?

Type
Research Article
Information
Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society , Volume 103 , Issue 1 , January 1988 , pp. 97 - 115
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge Philosophical Society 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

[1]Barr, M. and Diaconescu, R.. Atomic toposes. J. Pure Appl. Alg. 17 (1980), 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2]Bass, H.. Algebraic K-theory (Benjamin, 1968).Google Scholar
[3]Bénabou, J.. Introduction to bicategories, in Reports of the Midwest Category Seminar, Lecture Notes in Math. vol. 47 (Springer-Verlag, 1967), pp. 1–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Grothendieck, A.. Revêtements étales el groupe fondamentale. Lecture Notes in Math. vol. 224 (Springer-Verlag, 1971).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5]Isbell, J. R.. Atomless parts of spaces. Math. Scand. 31 (1972), 5–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6]Isbell, J. R.. Direct limits of meet-continuous lattices. J. Pure Appl. Alg. 23 (1982), 33–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Johnstone, P. T.. Factorization theorems for geometric morphisms I. Cahiers Top. Géom. Diff. 22 (1981), 3–17.Google Scholar
[8]Johnstone, P. T.. Stone Spaces (Cambridge University Press, 1982).Google Scholar
[9]Joyal, A. and Tierney, M.. An extension of the Galois theory of Grothendieck. Memoirs Amer. Math. Soc. 309 (1984).Google Scholar
[10]Moerdijk, I.. Continuous fibrations and inverse limits of Grothendieck toposes. Compositio Math. 58 (1986), 45–72.Google Scholar
[11]Moerdijk, I.. Prodiscrete groups, to appear (preprint: University of Amsterdam. Mathematics report 86–22).Google Scholar
[12]Moerdijk, I.. The classifying topos of a continuous groupoid, to appear in Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. (preprint: University of Amsterdam, Mathematics report 86–27).Google Scholar
[13]Moerdijk, I. and Wraith, G. C.. Connected locally connected toposes are path-connected. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 295 (1986), 849–859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14]Morita, K.. Duality of modules and its applications to the theory of rings with minimum condition. Sci. Rep. Tokyo Kyokiu Daigaku 6 Ser. A (1958), 83–142.Google Scholar