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

Site Tag Cloud

2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-theory cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration foundations functional-analysis functor gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry graph graphs gravity grothendieck group 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 k-theory kan lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology natural nforum nlab nonassociative noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pages 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 string-theory superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topological 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.
    • CommentAuthorPeter Heinig
    • CommentTimeJun 1st 2017

    Created left cancellative category. This is a useful technical term.

    One natural (and non-posetal) example is the category of fields with ring homomorphisms as the morphisms—provided that the zero ring is removed from it.

    Incidentally: is there a usual technical term for, when considering any category C\mathsf{C}, the full subcategory obtained by removing all terminal objects of C\mathsf{C}?

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeJun 1st 2017

    Who says the zero ring is a field?

    All the sources I know of have 010 \neq 1 as one of the field axioms.

    Incidentally, the link for your first reference goes to a paper whose title is different from the one you name.

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorPeter Heinig
    • CommentTimeJun 1st 2017

    Thanks, viewed this way, there is indeed nothing to be removed. Yes, usually, the zero ring is not considered a field. Simplified the nlab entry accordingly.

    Thanks also for mentioning that the title of the second reference had accidentally been used for the first reference, too. Corrected.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorPeter Heinig
    • CommentTimeJun 1st 2017
    • (edited Jun 1st 2017)

    On removing terminal objects: the full subcategory of a category C\mathsf{C} obtained by removing a single terminal object \bullet is isomorphic to the slice-category C/\mathsf{C}/\bullet over \bullet.

    In view of that, one can take the view that there is no need for a separate term.

    However, to express removing all terminal objects in terms of the concept of slice-category only, one needs to repeatedly take slice-categories.
    Moreover, a category can have a proper class of terminal objects.

    What do you consider a usual reference for the operation of iteratively taking slice-categories, possibly for each object in a proper class of objects?

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorjesse
    • CommentTimeJun 1st 2017

    I’m a little confused by the claim

    the full subcategory of a category C\mathsf{C} obtained by removing a single terminal object \bullet is isomorphic to the slice-category C/\mathsf{C}/\bullet over \bullet.

    Isn’t C\mathsf{C} canonically isomorphic to C/\mathsf{C}/\bullet? (Put another way: what happens to the terminal objects \bullet \to \bullet of the slice categories C/\mathsf{C}/\bullet in this iterative process where you want to delete all terminal objects?)

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorDavidRoberts
    • CommentTimeJun 1st 2017

    @jesse correct. Also: any slice category has a canonical representative of terminal object, namely the identity arrow. Removing a single object from a category is an act of violence, though it can be done. Unless you also remove all the objects isomorphic to it, you still end up with something equivalent to the starting category.

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeJun 1st 2017

    I added poset and preorder to the list of tautological examples, and removed the one about subobjects of a given object being a non-tautological example, since that is a preorder. I added another non-tautological example: the category of nontrivial vector spaces equipped with nondegenerate inner products.

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeJun 1st 2017
    • (edited Jun 1st 2017)

    [never mind]

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorPeter Heinig
    • CommentTimeJun 1st 2017

    @jesse @DavidRoberts Thanks for the comments. Yes, (thinking about) removing (or adding) terminal objects violates the principle of equivalence, so should perhaps be avoided unless there is a necessity to do so.

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorPeter Heinig
    • CommentTimeJun 1st 2017

    @ Todd_Trimble: Thanks for the edits, they appear to improve the page.

  1. Is the category of projective spaces an example?

    Also, the category of probability spaces and measure preserving maps is right cancellative. (Or at least it morally should be right cancellative, because the image of each map should be measure 11. To make it actually right cancellative you have to quotient together two maps if they differ only on a sufficiently small set (Although it’s not enough to say “on a set of measure 00” because the image of a measurable map need not be measurable. Maybe this is difficult). Or you can just demand that every map is a surjection, like Terry Tao does in these notes.) Also the category of random variables, which is the coslice around Ω\Omega in this category.

    • CommentRowNumber12.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 1st 2017
    • (edited Jun 1st 2017)


    it seems that you created an entry all arrows monic for the sole purpose of making those keywords take the reader to the entry left cancellative category. Is that right?

    In this case better to use the redirect functionality provided by the software: adding to the source code of any entry X a line of the form

      [!redirects alternative entry name]

    has the effect that calling the URL entry name

    takes the reader to the given entry X

    • CommentRowNumber13.
    • CommentAuthormaxsnew
    • CommentTimeFeb 25th 2019

    Removed a self-reference in “Related Concepts”. Were these formerly different pages or something?

    diff, v14, current

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)