Not signed in (Sign In)

Start a new discussion

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 bundles calculus categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-theory cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics comma complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science connection constructive cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration foundations functional-analysis functor galois-theory gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry goodwillie-calculus 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 history homological homological-algebra homology homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory k-theory lie lie-theory limit limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal-logic model model-category-theory monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology nonassociative noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pasting philosophy physics planar 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 simplicial space spin-geometry stable-homotopy-theory stack string string-theory subobject superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory 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.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeNov 15th 2010

    at monadicity theorem in the second formulation of the theorem, item 3, it said

    CC has

    I think it must be

    DD has

    and have changed it accordingly. But have a look.

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeNov 15th 2010

    Just for definiteness I stated (again) at conservative functor the property that such reflects all (co)limits wich it preserves

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2010

    Yes, that seems right to me.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorzskoda
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2010

    Then this would be true in particular for embeddings (fully faithful functors) of categories. If there are no limits of some type within original subcategory, then they are by definition preserved; on the other hand such limits are not reflected if they do exist in the target ambient category. Where is the error ?

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2010

    In other words, the proposition says that if limKlim K exists in CC, and if U:CDU: C \to D is a conservative functor such that U(limK)U(lim K) is the limit of UKU K in DD, and if const cKconst_c \to K is a cone for which the induced cone UcUKU c \to U K is the limit, then cc is the limit of KK. So one of the hypotheses is that the limit exists in the subcategory.

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorzskoda
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2010

    Thanks for more detailed/precise statement, Todd.

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeDec 6th 2010

    I added a couple more examples to monadicity theorem.

  1. Added a missing condition in the ‘specifically this means’ description of split coequalizers – the fact that the arrows form a fork doesn’t follow from the other conditions.

    Jonas Frey

    diff, v30, current

Add your comments
  • Please log in or leave your comment as a "guest post". If commenting as a "guest", please include your name in the message as a courtesy. Note: only certain categories allow guest posts.
  • To produce a hyperlink to an nLab entry, simply put double square brackets around its name, e.g. [[category]]. To use (La)TeX mathematics in your post, make sure Markdown+Itex is selected below and put your mathematics between dollar signs as usual. Only a subset of the usual TeX math commands are accepted: see here for a list.

  • (Help)