Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below
Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
I have received an email asking for clarification at the (old) entry equivalence of 2-categories, as to the meaning of “essentially full”. I have briefly added a parenthetical “i.e. essentially surjective on hom-categories”. But the entry deserves to be expanded a bit more, maybe somebody feels inspired to do so?
It’s not true in general that a strict 2-functor between strict 2-categories is a biequivalence (i.e. is biessentially surjective on objects and an equivalence on hom-categories) iff it is part of an “equivalence of 2-categories” as currently defined on this page: the ’inverse’ of the 2-functor might only be a pseudofunctor, not a strict 2-functor. See Example 3.1 in Steve Lack’s paper A Quillen model structure for 2-categories.
Feel free to edit the page, it could do with some re-structuring and additions; I was writing quickly earlier just to try to improve things a little. I will adjust the offending paragraph now.
added the classical recognition theorem for 2-equivalences assuming AC, copied over from the same material that I just wrote into 2-functor (see the other thread)
As a reference I have added pointer to Thm. 7.4.1 in
but maybe this prompts somobody else to add pointer to original references, if any.
1 to 6 of 6