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-categories 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-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science connection constructive constructive-mathematics cosmology definitions deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry differential-topology digraphs duality education elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration 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 homological homological-algebra homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory infinity integration integration-theory k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic manifolds mathematics measure-theory modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology multicategories 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 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.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeMar 13th 2014

    Just wondering about the dual of localization, I see from this Greenlees and Shipley paper that there is

    …the process of cellularization (sometimes known as colocalization or right localization)

    nLab appears to have none of these. Is it simply a less important construction?

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorZhen Lin
    • CommentTimeMar 13th 2014

    The sense of “localisation” used here is that of “reflective localisation”. One could equally well say “coreflective localisation” instead of “colocalisation”.

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeMar 13th 2014

    Is there a use for the dual concept in non-(co)reflective situations?

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorZhen Lin
    • CommentTimeMar 13th 2014

    Dual of what? The dual of reflective localisation is coreflective localisation.

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeMar 14th 2014

    If colocalization in a category is equivalent to localization in the opposite category, and if not all localization is reflective, then presumably there are occasions when people are using the term ’colocalization’ where it doesn’t mean coreflective localization.

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorZhen Lin
    • CommentTimeMar 14th 2014

    Localisation in the broad sense of inverting morphisms is a self-dual concept.

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorDavidRoberts
    • CommentTimeMar 14th 2014

    Are you talking about localisation as a weighted colimit in Cat, David?

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeMar 14th 2014

    I wasn’t thinking about it in any more precise a sense than at localization. I was just thinking about modalities, and how just as HoTT blurs a distinction that philosophers like to make between propositions and types, that modal operators applied to general types appears odd to those used to them acting only on propositions, as mentioned here. So I was just fishing about for operations which behave in a modal kind of way, and their duals.

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeMar 14th 2014
    • (edited Mar 14th 2014)

    David, the category of algebras over an idempotent monad forms a reflective localization of the ambient category, while that of an idempotent co-monad forms a co-reflective localization. And conversely. So (co-)localizations in the reflective sense are equivalently (co-)modal types for idempotent (co-)modalities.

    This is discussed at idempotent monad – Properties – Algebras for an idempotent monad and localization and briefly pointed to also from reflective subcategory – Properties – As Eilenberg-Moore category of the idempotent monad.

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeMar 14th 2014

    I have added some of that discussion about modal operators expressing a “way of being” of types at the beginning of modal type.

    • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthorJon Beardsley
    • CommentTimeMar 14th 2014

    For what it’s worth, this is certainly a notion that’s used in the stable homotopy category of spectra. To me, colocalization means “acyclization.” In other words, one can localize at a localizing subcategory (which could be thought of a category of acyclics of some homology theory, possibly), and colocalize at a colocalizing subcategory (which could be thought of as a category of locals for some homology theory). These notions are dual in a pretty meaningful way, in that there is a fiber sequence CXXLXCX\to X\to LX, where CC is the colocalization functor, and LL is the localization functor.

    • CommentRowNumber12.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeMar 14th 2014

    To rephrase what Zhen and Jon are saying, the coinverter of a class of morphisms in CC is the opposite of the coinverter of the same class of morphisms in C opC^{op}. (The inverter is a totally different kind of dualization.) But often when people (especially homotopy theorists) say “localization” they mean specifically a coinverter with a fully faithful right adjoint, and this can be dualized to a coinverter with a fully faithful left adjoint, which is thereby called “colocalization”.

    • CommentRowNumber13.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeMar 15th 2014

    Thanks for all the comments. I think there’s more that has been said here than contained in the nnLab, especially in terms of connections between terms - coinverters, modalities, etc.