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 moved extended natural number system to extended natural number and expanded it. In particular, it’s now a good place to link to if you want to say that an -concept from higher category theory makes sense “for any extended natural number ”.
So we could say decategorification and looping (as decribed in Categorification)) send -categories to -categories for all extended natural numbers (having tidied up numbering at the lower end and doing what is necessary to allow -categories to be images of -categories).
Yes! (And looping makes a monoidal -category.)
I have a query on the page about the embedding in , because even though I made a small fix, I still don’t think I got it right.
@David C. 2: That’s a nice way to put it! I don’t know if I put together before the facts that the ordinary natural numbers are the well-founded objects in the extended natural numbers (the inductive type sitting inside the coinductive type), whereas -categories are conveniently defined inductively for finite and coinductively for infinite .
@DR
Yes, there was supposed to be in there; I’ve fixed it. (I also divided by twice for some reason.)
The crazy way that it looked before is another itex “feature”.
Should the extended natural numbers start with instead? It is written in the section on universal property, “You can think of as mapping an element of to the number of times that must be applied in succession, starting from , before being taken out of .” In particular, if is undefined, so must be applied time before being taken out of , so should be equal to , right?
So it seems that takes values or .
Or redefine so that the number counts the times that can be applied while staying within .
[Administrative note: comments #1 - #8 originally belonged to a Latest Changes thread entitled ’Extended natural numbers’. The edit announcer does not know about page name changes that were made before it came into existence, so I have manually merged that thread with this one. I also deleted a one sentence comment of Mike’s in the old thread which basically just alerted to the fact that the edit announcer had used this thread. ]
In that sense, the set of extended natural numbers is a decategorification of the category of countable sets. Identify with the empty set, with a singleton, …, with a countable set. And identifies with the operation of taking the complement of a singleton in a set. Eg is undefined, is empty, is a singleton, … and is countable.
So is the extended natural number identified with the subset of containing those that satisfy . Thanks for suggesting the change, David!
1 to 12 of 12