Not signed in (Sign In)

Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

  • Sign in using OpenID

Site Tag Cloud

2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry book bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration foundation foundations functional-analysis functor gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry graph graphs gravity grothendieck group group-theory harmonic-analysis higher higher-algebra higher-category-theory higher-differential-geometry higher-geometry higher-lie-theory higher-topos-theory homological homological-algebra homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology nforum nlab noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pages pasting philosophy physics pro-object probability probability-theory quantization quantum quantum-field quantum-field-theory quantum-mechanics quantum-physics quantum-theory question representation representation-theory riemannian-geometry scheme schemes set set-theory sheaf sheaves simplicial space spin-geometry stable-homotopy-theory stack string string-theory superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory tqft type type-theory universal variational-calculus

Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to nForum
If you want to take part in these discussions either sign in now (if you have an account), apply for one now (if you don't).
    • CommentRowNumber1.
    • CommentAuthorDavidRoberts
    • CommentTimeOct 13th 2020

    Moving discussion here and summarizing content in the text

    +– {: .query} Mike: Why only rings without units (that is, rngs)? Intuitively, what important properties do the above listed examples share that are not shared by rings with units?

    Zoran Skoda: I want to know the answer as well. It might be something in the self-dual axioms. For unital rings artinian implies noetherian but not other way around; though the definitions of the two notions are dual.

    Toby: The category of unital rings and unitary ring homomorphisms has no zero object.

    Mike: Ah, right. Is it protomodular? I think I will understand this definition better from some non-examples that violate each clause individually.

    walt: It is protomodular. This follows from the main theorem of Characterization of Protomodular Varieties of Universal Algebra by Bourn and Janelidze. By that theorem any variety that contains a group will be protomodular. Unital rings only fail to be semiabelian for the trivial reason that ideals aren’t subrings.

    =–

    Maybe the result on protomodularity (with citation) mentioned by walt citing Bourn and Janelidze should be moved to CRing (and also Ring, if it holds for non-commutative rings).

    diff, v34, current

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeMar 12th 2021

    Touched the wording and formatting of the Idea-section, in an attempt to streamline a little.

    diff, v35, current

  1. removing old query box:

    +– {: .query} Urs: how can I understand that this (has to?) involve the opposite category?

    Mike: Well, as the previous example shows, Set *Set_* itself is not semi-abelian. The way I’m thinking of it is that a surjection of pointed sets is not determined by its kernel, but an injection of pointed sets is determined by its cokernel. =–

    Anonymous

    diff, v37, current

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorDmitri Pavlov
    • CommentTimeMar 25th 2023