Not signed in (Sign In)

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 beauty bundles calculus categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-theory cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics comma 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 goodwillie-calculus graph graphs gravity group-theory harmonic-analysis higher higher-algebra higher-category-theory higher-differential-geometry higher-geometry higher-lie-theory higher-topos-theory homological homological-algebra homology homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory internal-categories k-theory lie-theory limit limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology newpage noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory 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-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.
    • CommentAuthorJohn Baez
    • CommentTimeDec 20th 2009
    The definition of braided monoidal category was wrong or at least nonstandard, because it left out one of the hexagon axioms and included a 'compatibility with the unit object' law which follows from the usual definition.

    I changed it to the usual definition.

    If the nonstandard definition is equivalent to the usual one, I'd love to know why! But I don't see how you get two hexagons from one, even given compatibility with the unit object.

    (Of course for a symmetric monoidal category we just need one hexagon.)

    I also beefed up the definition at symmetric monoidal category so the poor reader doesn't need to run back to braided monoidal, then monoidal.
    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeDec 20th 2009

    I made a stub for pseudomonoid and referenced it from braided monoidal category.

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeDec 20th 2009

    I put in a little stub at symmetric monoidal natural transformation. Really what we need now are braided monoidal functor and monoidal natural transformation. Luckily, the definitions are all in that little expository note of yours, John.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeDec 20th 2009
    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeDec 20th 2009
    • (edited Dec 20th 2009)

    Possibly. Sometimes it's nice to have something just explicitly say: there is nothing new here; Urs does that sort of thing sometimes. But if anybody puts in the definition explicitly, that should be moved to monoidal natural transformation.

    I'd do all of this now, but I don't have time. Maybe after Christmas.

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeDec 21st 2009
    • (edited Dec 21st 2009)
    This comment is invalid XHTML+MathML+SVG; displaying source. <div> <blockquote> Sometimes it's nice to have something just explicitly say: there is nothing new here; </blockquote> <p>Yes, sometimes it's a difficult design decision. For instance whether to have <a href="">domain opfibration</a> and <a href="">codomain fibration</a> be separate entries.</p> <p>On the one hand it may be useful to have separate entries for separate terms. The danger is that we keep track of which information we keep where, and which is duplicated. We should in any case be sure to include a prominently featured remark along the lines "See also the closely relate entry xyz".</p> </div>
    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 1st 2016

    I have edited the formatting of the Definition-section a little, such as to make it look more like a mathematical definition.

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorIngoBlechschmidt
    • CommentTimeFeb 3rd 2018
    • (edited Feb 3rd 2018)

    Added to braided monoidal category an absolute minimum of two easy examples. We should mention more! The current list doesn’t give a well-rounded view. For anyone wanting to help, examples could, for instance, be lifted from the the first-mentioned reference (Joyal/Street).

  1. Yes, certainly the ’canonical’ example (free braided monoidal category on one object) should be there (coproduct of the braid groups). No time at the moment unfortunately.