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

Discussion Tag Cloud

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 8th 2012
    • (edited Nov 8th 2012)

    I have expanded various sections at disjoint coproduct. In particular towards the end is now a mentioning of the fact that in a positive category morphisms into a disjoint coproduct are given by factoring disjoint summands of the domain through the canonical inclusions.

    Also,I made positive category and variants redirect to extensive category.

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeNov 8th 2012

    Is the phrase “positive category” intended to include coherent-ness, or not?

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeNov 8th 2012

    Is the phrase “positive category” intended to include coherent-ness, or not?

    Johnstone in the Elephant on p. 34 says “positive” for “coherent + disjoint coproducts”, as you will know. You once wrote “Extensive categories are also called positive categories, especially if they are also coherent.”

    I am agnostic about it.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeNov 8th 2012

    I thought he only said “positive coherent category”, never “positive category” without the adjective “coherent”. But I don’t have the Elephant in front of me right now…

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeNov 9th 2012
    • (edited Nov 9th 2012)

    It says on that p. 34:

    We call a coherent category positive if it has disjoint finite coproducts

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeNov 9th 2012

    That could equally well be read in either way. I guess I read [past tense] it my way and you read it your way. (-: I guess I was assuming that he was using it by analogy with the adjective “effective” for regular categories. I’m pretty sure he does say “effective regular category”, not ever just “effective category”.

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorSam Staton
    • CommentTimeOct 5th 2020

    examples of disjoint coproducts.

    diff, v11, current

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorSam Staton
    • CommentTimeOct 5th 2020
    I put some examples and non-examples of disjoint coproducts. But just now I can't think of a naturally occuring category that has all coproducts disjoint but which isn't extensive.
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)