Results 1 
4 of
4
On the representation theory of Galois and atomic topoi
 J. Pure Appl. Algebra
"... introduction ..."
Galois Groupoids and Covering Morphisms in Topos Theory
"... The goals of this paper are (1) to compare the Galois groupoid that appears naturally in the construction of the fundamental groupoid of a topos E bounded over an arbitrary base topos S given by Bunge (1992), with the formal Galois groupoid defined by Janelidze (1990) in a very general setting given ..."
Abstract

Cited by 2 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The goals of this paper are (1) to compare the Galois groupoid that appears naturally in the construction of the fundamental groupoid of a topos E bounded over an arbitrary base topos S given by Bunge (1992), with the formal Galois groupoid defined by Janelidze (1990) in a very general setting given by a pair of adjoint functors, and (2) to discuss a good notion of covering morphism of a topos E over S which is general enough to include, in addition to the covering projections determined by the locally constant objects, also the unramified morphisms of topos theory given by those local homeomorphisms which are at the same time complete spreads in the sense of BungeFunk (1996, 1998).
The fundamental progroupoid of a general topos
"... Abstract. It is well known that the category of covering projections (that is, locally constant objects) of a locally connected topos is equivalent to the classifying topos of a strict progroupoid (or, equivalently, a localic prodiscrete groupoid), the fundamental progroupoid, and that this progroup ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. It is well known that the category of covering projections (that is, locally constant objects) of a locally connected topos is equivalent to the classifying topos of a strict progroupoid (or, equivalently, a localic prodiscrete groupoid), the fundamental progroupoid, and that this progroupoid represents first degree cohomology. In this paper we generalize these results to an arbitrary topos. The fundamental progroupoid is now a localic progroupoid, and can not be replaced by a localic groupoid. The classifying topos in not any more a Galois topos. Not all locally constant objects can be considered as covering projections. The key contribution of this paper is a novel definition of covering projection for a general topos, which coincides with the usual definition when the topos is locally connected. The results in this paper were presented in a talk at the Category Theory Conference, Vancouver July 2004. introduction. It is well known that if E is a locally connected topos then the category of covering projections (that is, locally constant objects) is equivalent to the classifying topos of a strict progroupoid (or, equivalently, a localic prodiscrete
FUNDAMENTAL PUSHOUT TOPOSES
"... Abstract. The author [2, 5] introduced and employed certain ‘fundamental pushout toposes ’ in the construction of the coverings fundamental groupoid of a locally connected topos. Our main purpose in this paper is to generalize this construction without the local connectedness assumption. In the spir ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. The author [2, 5] introduced and employed certain ‘fundamental pushout toposes ’ in the construction of the coverings fundamental groupoid of a locally connected topos. Our main purpose in this paper is to generalize this construction without the local connectedness assumption. In the spirit of [16, 10, 8] we replace connected components by constructively complemented, or definable, monomorphisms [1]. Unlike the locally connected case, where the fundamental groupoid is localic prodiscrete and its classifying topos is a Galois topos, in the general case our version of the fundamental groupoid is a locally discrete progroupoid and there is no intrinsic Galois theory in the sense of [19]. We also discuss covering projections, locally trivial, and branched coverings without local connectedness by analogy with, but also necessarily departing from, the locally connected case [13, 11, 7]. Throughout, we work abstractly in a setting given axiomatically by a category V of locally discrete locales that has as examples the categories D of discrete locales, and Z of zerodimensional locales [9]. In this fashion we are led to give unified and often simpler proofs of old theorems in the locally connected case, as well as new ones without that assumption.