Not signed in

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

• Username
• Password
• Remember me

• Sign in using OpenID
• Remember me

• Forgot your password?
• Apply for membership

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 definitions 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 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

1. • CommentRowNumber1.
   • CommentAuthorYaron
   • CommentTimeSep 3rd 2011
   • (edited Sep 3rd 2011)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Yaron
   Format: MarkdownItexI've moved part of my beginner's summery on [[Mac Lane's proof of the coherence theorem for monoidal categories]] to the $n$Lab. Surely there are many mistakes, possibly fatal: I am most worried about the naive definition I used for the syntax of arrows (sadly, I could only use my nearly zero knowledge of logic), and the part including the units and unitors. There are probably many itex errors too. At some point I've realized that it was silly to use the cumbersome arrow language as is (say, writing a string like $\alpha u v u$ instead of $\alpha_{u,v,w}$, etc.), but to correct this required changing all figures, and this is too much for me at the moment. I also apologize for using files for figures (admiting that some of them shouldn't even be figures), but it was too much work to do all the transition from my notes to itex in one jump. I hope learning by seeing this page modified by people knowing more than me (anyone here, that is :) ), but if this page seems beyond hope, I have no objections to renaming it so that it will not clutter the 'lab. By the way, now that I've re-entered the page, all figures appear with a question mark, and to the see the figure I have to press on the question-mark link (previously I've seen all figures appearing in the page). Is there any way to solve this problem?

   I’ve moved part of my beginner’s summery on Mac Lane’s proof of the coherence theorem for monoidal categories to the $n$Lab.

   Surely there are many mistakes, possibly fatal: I am most worried about the naive definition I used for the syntax of arrows (sadly, I could only use my nearly zero knowledge of logic), and the part including the units and unitors. There are probably many itex errors too.

   At some point I’ve realized that it was silly to use the cumbersome arrow language as is (say, writing a string like $\alpha u v u$ instead of $\alpha_{u,v,w}$, etc.), but to correct this required changing all figures, and this is too much for me at the moment. I also apologize for using files for figures (admiting that some of them shouldn’t even be figures), but it was too much work to do all the transition from my notes to itex in one jump.

   I hope learning by seeing this page modified by people knowing more than me (anyone here, that is :) ), but if this page seems beyond hope, I have no objections to renaming it so that it will not clutter the ’lab.

   By the way, now that I’ve re-entered the page, all figures appear with a question mark, and to the see the figure I have to press on the question-mark link (previously I’ve seen all figures appearing in the page). Is there any way to solve this problem?

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeSep 3rd 2011
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexI have added links back and forth with the stub [[coherence theorem for monoidal categories]]. Maybe the two entries should be merged into one?

   I have added links back and forth with the stub coherence theorem for monoidal categories. Maybe the two entries should be merged into one?

3. • CommentRowNumber3.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeSep 3rd 2011
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexI forgot to say: awesome that you have produced this entry!

   I forgot to say: awesome that you have produced this entry!

4. • CommentRowNumber4.
   • CommentAuthorYaron
   • CommentTimeSep 3rd 2011
   • PermaLink
   Author: Yaron
   Format: MarkdownItexThanks, Urs! I've put this in a separate entry to avoid cluttering Todd's advanced comments.

   Thanks, Urs! I’ve put this in a separate entry to avoid cluttering Todd’s advanced comments.

5. • CommentRowNumber5.
   • CommentAuthorzskoda
   • CommentTimeSep 4th 2011
   • (edited Sep 4th 2011)
   • PermaLink
   Author: zskoda
   Format: MarkdownItexI think it is OK to have a separate entry for so long specific proof, as Yaron has concluded. By the way, another, more general approach, in terms of indexed categories, having the MacLane coherence theorem as a corollary is the subject of a paper * S. MacLane, R. Paré, _Coherence for bicategories and indexed categories_, J. Pure Appl. Algebra , 37 (1985) pp. 59–80 Another very general method using 2-rewriting systems is in a recent paper of Tibor Béke. Maybe we should incorporate and comment these references in one of the entries on coherences. This week will be again tough with me, with administrative deadlines, hosting scientific guest and a longer medical appointment, so likely not me.

   I think it is OK to have a separate entry for so long specific proof, as Yaron has concluded.

   By the way, another, more general approach, in terms of indexed categories, having the MacLane coherence theorem as a corollary is the subject of a paper

   • S. MacLane, R. Paré, Coherence for bicategories and indexed categories, J. Pure Appl. Algebra , 37 (1985) pp. 59–80

   Another very general method using 2-rewriting systems is in a recent paper of Tibor Béke. Maybe we should incorporate and comment these references in one of the entries on coherences. This week will be again tough with me, with administrative deadlines, hosting scientific guest and a longer medical appointment, so likely not me.

6. • CommentRowNumber6.
   • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
   • CommentTimeSep 4th 2011
   • PermaLink
   Author: Todd_Trimble
   Format: MarkdownItexIn addition to Tibor Béke, one should also mention the work of Jonathan Cohen. I'll get to this at some point. (I hope.) If I recall correctly, the Mac Lane-Paré paper is similar in its syntactic methodology to the usual Mac Lane proof. There is a more "semantic" proof of the coherence theorem based on the Yoneda embedding, described in various places (such as Braided Tensor Categories, without mentioning Yoneda however). In outline, for bicategories $B$, one embeds $B$ locally fully and faithfully in the *strict* 2-category $Cat^{B^{op}}$. Checking all the details requires a few diagram chases, but overall this is a very attractive alternative strategy.

   In addition to Tibor Béke, one should also mention the work of Jonathan Cohen. I’ll get to this at some point. (I hope.)

   If I recall correctly, the Mac Lane-Paré paper is similar in its syntactic methodology to the usual Mac Lane proof. There is a more “semantic” proof of the coherence theorem based on the Yoneda embedding, described in various places (such as Braided Tensor Categories, without mentioning Yoneda however). In outline, for bicategories $B$, one embeds $B$ locally fully and faithfully in the strict 2-category $Cat^{B^{op}}$. Checking all the details requires a few diagram chases, but overall this is a very attractive alternative strategy.