Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below
Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
1 to 3 of 3
Quick question as to which nLab pages I should be reading for the following situation:
I have bifunctors Hi:Ai×Bi→C which are a bit like a hom-functor. I have a functor F:A1→A2 and G:B2→B1 which are “adjoint” in the sense that H1(a,G(b))≅H2(F(a),b) for all a∈A1 and b∈B2, naturally in both. Where do I look to learn about these things? In particular, are there conditions on F or G, similar to the adjoint functor theorems, that guarantee that they have an adjoint (ie so if I only know one, when can I deduce that the other exists?)?
In case it helps to be more specific, C is actually the category of Z-graded sets for some fixed set Z, A1 is Z-graded B1s, H1 is the corresponding Z-graded hom-functor and similarly for the 2 versions.
Maybe in your last line some words are missing or something? Not sure, but if your setup can be thought of as taking place entirely in Set/Z-enriched category theory then all theorems and everything hold as usual.
It doesn’t take place in a Set/Z-enriched category. The thing to think about is graded Lawvere theories. I think that my generalisation isn’t quite right, so here’s some more details of the specific situation. First, the simple ungraded lemma:
Let D be a cocomplete (locally small) category. A functor G:D→Set has a left adjoint if and only if it is representable.
Proof: adjoint ⇒ representable: G(d)≅Set(⋆,G(d))≅D(F(⋆),d)
representable ⇒ adjoint: if G(d)=D(d0,d), define F(x)≔∐xd0, then Set(x,G(d))≅G(d)x=D(d0,d)x≅D(∐xd0,d).
Now the graded version. We have a cocomplete (locally small) category D. We consider DZ, the category of Z-graded objects in D (aka the category of functors Z→D where Z is viewed as a small discrete category). We can extend the hom-functor on D to a bifunctor DZ×D→SetZ in the (hopefully) obvious way. Then the result is:
A functor G:D→SetZ has a left adjoint if and only if it is representable by an object in DZ.
The proof isn’t that much more complicated than the ungraded version, but I’d like to know the general context into which it fits (and thus if there’s a Main Result that can be quoted to avoid having to give the proof at all).
1 to 3 of 3