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.
    • CommentAuthorZhen Lin
    • CommentTimeSep 4th 2013

    I added an explicit definition of cartesian model category to cartesian closed model category to highlight the convention that the terminal object is assumed cofibrant.

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeNov 11th 2013

    I have added to cartesian model structure and to model structure on topological spaces the remark that the standard model structure on compactly generated weakly Hausdorff topological spaces is a cartesian model structure

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorDmitri Pavlov
    • CommentTimeMar 21st 2021

    Removed “closed” from the title. Redirects.

    diff, v7, current

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 14th 2021
    • (edited Jun 14th 2021)

    I have added the equivalent statement of the pullback-power axiom to the definition

    diff, v8, current

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 14th 2021

    Re #3:

    Removed “closed” from the title.

    I was feeling we should, in contrast, expand out the title to “cartesian closed monoidal category”.

    Because the word “cartesian category” is ambiguous, and yet “cartesian closed monoidal category” is not among its usual uses.

    In any case, I made “cartesian closed monoidal model category” a redirect here.

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorDmitri Pavlov
    • CommentTimeJun 14th 2021

    Re #5: My use of “cartesian model category” was based on the fact that this particular term is commonly used in existing literature, e.g., in Simpson’s book.

    Whereas cartesian category is indeed ambiguous, cartesian model category is not, because one of the meanings (category with finite products) becomes vacuous for model categories (which always have finite products by definition).

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeJun 14th 2021

    It’s pretty standard to say monoidal model category without adding the adjective “closed”, so it seems reasonable to me to omit it here too. I would probably lean towards “cartesian monoidal model category” myself, with a remark and redirect for the common shortening “cartesian model category”.

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)