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 complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive constructive-mathematics cosmology definitions deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry differential-topology digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration finite foundations functional-analysis functor galois-theory gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry graph graphs gravity grothendieck 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 infinity integration integration-theory k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal-logic model model-category-theory monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology multicategories newpage 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-theory subobject 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.
    • CommentAuthorJon Beardsley
    • CommentTimeMar 7th 2012
    I filled in a page that Urs created: well-generated triangulated category . I am really confused about the documentation of "small" and "compact" and so forth in the nlab. I made some links, but please, if somebody knows what should point to where, go ahead and fix it. I feel like maybe there should be pages just dedicated to "small object" and "compact object" as well "compactly generated category" but there appears to be a lot of stuff documenting such things already, just perhaps not explicitly said.
    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeMar 7th 2012

    I can’t tell where the link to “compactly generated” should go because I don’t know what it’s referring to. Compactly generated what? (Pages on the nLab are generally named with nouns, not adjectives.)

    I made the link “small” point to compact object, which contains a section on this notion of smallness in additive categories. The page small object is basically a glorified redirect to compact object; I’m not sure why it needs to exist separately. Are there other pages about compact/small objects that you found confusing?

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorJon Beardsley
    • CommentTimeMar 7th 2012
    Sorry. Feel free to remove the "compactly generated" link. I meant compactly generated category I guess. Yeah I mean that's fine. Thanks!
    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeMar 7th 2012

    No need to apologize; it takes some practice to learn the conventions of a community (have you read the naming conventions section of the HowTo?). What do you mean by a compactly generated category? I’m not familiar with that term either.

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorJon Beardsley
    • CommentTimeMar 7th 2012
    • (edited Mar 7th 2012)
    I guess the reason it came up was because I was reading this (specifically just the introduction) and I took it to be a collection of generators of a category in the standard sense except that it was composed entirely of compact objects. I feel like maybe this also comes up in Hovey, Palmieri and Strickland's "Axiomatic Stable Homotopy Theory" (although maybe in a different sense)? In general I feel like I often encounter notions of categories being "accessible" in one way or another because of some nice set of "generators" of some kind.


    Later edit: And indeed in this paper Neeman defines that terminology, and I think it is as I said above (Definition 1.7).
    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeMar 7th 2012

    Oh – did you mean to link to “compactly generated triangulated category”? The quote “the appropriate generalization of compactly generated for triangulated categories” at well-generated triangulated category sounded to me as though it was describing them as a generalization to triangulated categories of a notion of “compactly generated category” that applied to non- triangulated categories. But looking at the references, it does seem that Krause in that quote was referring to compactly generated triangulated categories, even though in that case I can’t make any sense of the definite article in “the appropriate generalization” (or, for that matter, the referent of “appropriate” – appropriate for what?).

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorJon Beardsley
    • CommentTimeMar 7th 2012
    Yeah you're right. Should have said triangulated. Is the generalization related to the fact that well-generated allows for some choice of a cardinal in some way? I don't know.
    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeMar 7th 2012
    • (edited Mar 7th 2012)

    Does “compactly generated” here mean “locally presentable”, i.e., does ’compact’ mean κ\kappa-compact for some regular infinite cardinal κ\kappa, and ’generated’ in the sense of every object being a κ\kappa-filtered colimit of κ\kappa-compact objects?

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeMar 7th 2012

    I’ll let the question in #8 stand, even though it reflects that I had not been following the thread carefully starting from #1. In any case, it would be nice to see the relation to local presentability clarified.

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorjdc
    • CommentTimeJun 20th 2018

    Well-generated is weaker than compactly generated, not stronger. Correct the definition of alpha-small. Fix the link to Krause’s paper.

    diff, v8, 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)