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.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeOct 19th 2009
    Asked a question there.
    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeOct 21st 2009
    This comment is invalid XHTML+MathML+SVG; displaying source. <div> <p>I added at <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Cauchy+complete+category">Cauchy complete category</a> the direct hyperlink to <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/free+cocompletion">free cocompletion</a>.</p> <p>I have a question: why does it say there</p> <blockquote> ... preserves small coproducts and coequalizers. </blockquote> <p>and not just "preserves small colimits". Do you mean "...preserves small coproducts and ALL coequalizers"?</p> <p>I am also not sure if I understand the "all presheaves that are connected and projective". What does "connected" mean here? I think that should have a hyperlink.</p> <p>I'll add to <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/tiny+object">tiny object</a> the example: every representable in a presheaf category.</p> </div>
    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeOct 21st 2009

    Please have a look at the example section I wrote at tiny object, pointing to Cauchy completion.

    I haven't really looked into this Cauchy completion business. I'd be interested in seeing at Cauchy completion one or two examples spelled out, or at least indicated. I understand and appreciate how metric spaces are enriched categories, but I am not sure yet about the Cauchy completion part (of couse I know that i can read about it in Lawvere's article, if you force me to).

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeOct 21st 2009

    I'll see about getting around to uncompleted business at Cauchy completion.

    An object X is connected if hom(X, -) preserves coproducts (as explained at connected space). An object is projective if hom(X, -) preserves coequalizers of parallel pairs of maps.

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeOct 21st 2009

    I have now added material to Cauchy complete category, with particular detailed attention to the classical case of metric spaces. I think it might be time to remove the old discussion I had with Toby, since we apparently came to a consensus (and I'm tired of rereading my snippy response (-: ).

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeOct 21st 2009

    Are you sure you want to use "projective" that way? The usual meaning of projective object is that hom(X,-) preserves some kind of epimorphism. But I think even preserving regular epimorphisms doesn't mean that it preserves coequalizers.

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeOct 21st 2009

    Some edits and a query at tiny object.

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeOct 21st 2009
    • (edited Oct 21st 2009)

    [Edit] I think there's every likelihood that Mike is right about preservation of coequalizers not meaning the same thing as preservation of regular epis (off hand not even sure it's true if pullbacks are preserved). So we might want to reconsider using "projective" that way, although I thought I had a vague memory that it was sometimes used that way.

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeOct 21st 2009
    That's wonderfully written. Thanks, Todd.
    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeOct 22nd 2009
    Yet another question about the relation between Cauchy completion and ideal completion.
    • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeOct 22nd 2009

    I also wanted to say: Thanks, Todd, that's an impressive entry. I need to keep this stuff in mind, it clearly points towards something big and important.

    • CommentRowNumber12.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeOct 22nd 2009
    • (edited Oct 22nd 2009)

    I have added a bunch of hyperlinks now to Cauchy complete category.

    • CommentRowNumber13.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeOct 22nd 2009

    I changed references to 'contractive maps' into 'short maps'. The former term seems to vary in the literature; for example, Wikipedia defines it (presumably following the reference that it gives) as any Lipschitz map, while the next Google hit defines it as a map with a Lipschitz constant strictly less than $1$ (and which therefore has a fixed point).

    • CommentRowNumber14.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeOct 22nd 2009

    I wrote connected object, although only for objects of an extensive category, since only this was explained at connected space.

    • CommentRowNumber15.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJul 26th 2011

    I have added to Cauchy complete category an Example-subsection on Cauchy-completion of prosets and posets in regular and exact categories, citing an article by Rosolini.

    • CommentRowNumber16.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJul 27th 2011

    I have added to Cauchy complete category a fairly extensive list of explicit definitions, propositions and theorems from Borceux-Dejean (linked to there).

    Nothing that was not already indicated in the Idea-section, but I found it worthwhile to spell it all out in a bit more detail.

    • CommentRowNumber17.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJul 28th 2011

    I have added to Cauchy complete category a further subsection: In terms of essential geometric morphisms.

    This is supposed to contain the statements that Todd was pointing out in another thread here.

    • CommentRowNumber18.
    • CommentAuthorTim Campion
    • CommentTimeMar 2nd 2014

    I’ve added a few examples based on this nCafe discussion. They’re not worked out at all, but I wanted to highlight the sheer variety of different things that Cauchy completion can mean. One thing this list could use is some references – I really wasn’t sure about these.

    • CommentRowNumber19.
    • CommentAuthorTim_Porter
    • CommentTimeMar 2nd 2014

    There is an early paper by Street (1974) mentioned in Kelly’s enriched monograph. Kelly discusses Cauchy completeness to some extent, so perhaps that could be put as a starting point. I do not know that stuff well enough to be sure.

    • CommentRowNumber20.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeMar 19th 2021

    Added link to

    • {#NST2020} Branko Nikolić, Ross Street, Giacomo Tendas, Cauchy completeness for DG-categories, arxiv, 2020

    diff, v55, current

    • CommentRowNumber21.
    • CommentAuthorMorgan Rogers
    • CommentTimeMay 10th 2021

    Added note about smallness vs essential smallness.

    diff, v57, current

    • CommentRowNumber22.
    • CommentAuthorJohn Baez
    • CommentTimeJun 20th 2023

    Changed “pre-additive category” to “Ab\mathbb N\mathbf{Ab}-enriched category” here, since that’s what is meant here, while the article pre-additive category defines a pre-additive category to be an Ab\mathbf{Ab}-enriched category with a zero object (while acknowledging that it’s also used to mean an Ab\mathbf{Ab}-enriched category).

    diff, v65, current

    • CommentRowNumber23.
    • CommentAuthorJohn Baez
    • CommentTimeJun 20th 2023

    Explained what Cauchy completion has to do with Karoubi envelope in the case of Ab-enriched categories.

    diff, v66, current

    • CommentRowNumber24.
    • CommentAuthorJohn Baez
    • CommentTimeJun 21st 2023

    Added description of Cauchy completion for RModR Mod-enriched categories, and a reference where you can get a proof.

    diff, v67, current

    • CommentRowNumber25.
    • CommentAuthorJohn Baez
    • CommentTimeJun 21st 2023

    Added reference to more discussion about Cauchy completion of suplattice-enriched categories.

    diff, v67, current

    • CommentRowNumber26.
    • CommentAuthorJohn Baez
    • CommentTimeJun 22nd 2023

    Added more information about Lack and Tendas’ result on when an enriched category is Cauchy complete.

    diff, v68, current

    • CommentRowNumber27.
    • CommentAuthorvarkor
    • CommentTimeNov 26th 2023

    Added a reference for Cauchy complete 2-categories.

    diff, v72, current

    • CommentRowNumber28.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeNov 26th 2023

    Am moving the following “Discussion” (originating in revision 19 from 2009) out of the entry to here:


    David: Concerning the result that on Set the terminal F-coalgebra is the Cauchy completion of the initial F-algebra, for certain F, I wonder if we have to factor completions through the metric space completion, as Barr does in Terminal coalgebras for endofunctors on sets. Perhaps Adamek’s work on Final Algebras are Ideal Completions of Initial Algebras is more natural.

    Does this all tie in with the ideal completion as discussed by Awodey where you sum types/sets in a topos into a universal object?

    How many kinds of completion are there for an enriched category? I see some may coincide in certain cases.

    If two categories can be Morita equivalent, should this be reflected in the page Morita equivalence?


    diff, v73, current