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 accessible adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry 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 galois-theory 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 history 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 newpage nlab noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number 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 simplicial space spin-geometry stable-homotopy-theory string string-theory 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.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeOct 23rd 2009
    Rather than ask whether it's worth it and have Urs say "do it, don't talk about it!", I started a page to compare different notions of completion. Fortunately, we are well supplied with experts on the subject. What would be great would be a comparison of different completion processes. How widely they are applicable, e.g., to the enriched case? In which situations two or more coincide, etc.
    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorJonAwbrey
    • CommentTimeOct 23rd 2009

    I think you should call it n-telechy …

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeOct 24th 2009

    Thanks, David.

    Ignoring my own advice I'll remark here, instead of implementing it immediately, that there are also notions of "completions" of things that are not categories, of course. Maybe the entry should be renamed to "completion of a category"?

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeOct 24th 2009

    Jon,

    just for your information, I didn't get that one either. Probably my German lack of humour, or possibly my German lack of English language skill. I have a guess, but even with that I don't see how this is at all related to David's message.

    But in any case, can't we agree that we try to reduce the irrelevant exchanges here a bit, at least as long as it isn't clear that we all mostly share the same enjoyment for them?

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeOct 24th 2009
    I agree with Urs. Just because entelechy means the movement towards fulfilment, and so vaguely relates to completion, and begins with the same sound as 'n-category' doesn't make this amusing. If this sort of comment formed 1% of a parcel of useful contributions, it might be tolerable.
    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeOct 24th 2009
    This comment is invalid XHTML+MathML+SVG; displaying source. <div> Urs wrote <br/><br/><blockquote><br/><br/>Maybe the entry should be renamed to "completion of a category"?<br/><br/></blockquote><br/><br/>Some of the entries apply to enriched categories, so it could be "completion of an enriched category". On the other hand, the one current example applying to something more special than a category is the profinite completion of a group. But one can profinitely complete a wider range of things - isn't this pro-completion? And we need ind-completion too.<br/><br/>Also, aren't there completion constructions which don't have 'completion' in their names? </div>
    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeOct 24th 2009

    Also, aren't there completion constructions which don't have 'completion' in their names?

    Sure; in general, I would consider any regular mono-reflector to be a completion. And then there's algebraic completion, which I would not consider really a completion (because of its inferior form of uniqueness, which stops it from being reflective).

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeOct 26th 2009

    I added some remarks to completion about completions in general and how the distinction between "completion" and "free cocompletion" relates to "property" vs "property-like structure". The organization is suboptimal but I don't know how to fix it right now; please refactor if anyone has a better idea.

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeOct 26th 2009

    I added a couple of examples and links, including a counterexample to argue that a ‘completion’ should be monic.

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeOct 26th 2009
    Looking good! This could be a great page to show how category theory systematises a concept. Should there be pro-completion?

    I wonder what some good concrete examples are to show differences.
    • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeOct 26th 2009

    I added pro-completion of a category and Stone-Cech compactification. Is the unit of the reflection for the profinite completion of a group monic?

    David, are you wondering about more examples of borderline cases? Like reflectors that aren't monic or property-like structure that isn't a property?

    • CommentRowNumber12.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeOct 26th 2009
    I think I meant is there anything approaching the ideal case of a category where different completions give different categories, all of which are recognisably important.

    Does the list continue to anything interesting:
    free cocompletion: free completion :: Ind-completion: Pro-completion:: ideal completion: ???, the free completion under cofiltered limits of epimorphisms.
    • CommentRowNumber13.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeOct 26th 2009

    I want to call the last item ‘filter completion’, although ‘filter’ can be rather overloaded.

    • CommentRowNumber14.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeOct 26th 2009

    "filter completion" is of course the obvious dual of "ideal completion." Not sure whether I think it's a good name though.

    I don't think I've ever seen anyone write about the dual of ideal completion, but I seem to recall that maybe pro-objects whose transition maps are epi are sometimes better behaved than arbitrary ones? Perhaps sometimes when people work with "good pro-objects" they are really working in this "filter completion"?

    • CommentRowNumber15.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeOct 27th 2009
    We could make this page more cohesive. It's not clear when in the 'List of completions' we have examples of enriched category completions: Cauchy completion of a metric space (yes) of a uniform space (no?), Dedekind completion of a linear order (yes for 2-enriched categories?)

    We have a long list of enriched categories. Does anything worth noting happen when we complete these?
    • CommentRowNumber16.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeOct 27th 2009

    this is becoming a great page, guys, neat

    • CommentRowNumber17.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeOct 28th 2009
    Asked yet another question, and added MacNeille completion.
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)