considerably expanded the Idea-section

]]>starting something – not done yet, but need to save

]]>added missing pointer to *commutative monoid in a symmetric monoidal category*

made more explicit (here) the back-link to *topological vector bundle* for classical concordance for topological vector bundles

How would people feel about renaming [[distributor]] to [[profunctor]]? I seem to recall that when this came up on the Cafe, I was the main proponent of the former over the latter, and I've since changed my mind.

]]>added pointer to

- Maren Justesen,
*Bikategorien af Profunktorer*, Aarhus 1968 (pdf)

(via user varkor, here)

]]>Add a stub page to host the thesis.

]]>fixed the statement of Example 5.2 (this example) by restricting it to $\mathcal{C} = sSet$

]]>Add a students section (very sparse at the moment).

]]>I wanted to be able to use the link without it appearing in grey, so I created a stub for general relativity.

]]>Add references relating to rewriting.

]]>I see that Peter Selinger edited and added material to category with duals

]]>a stub, for the moment just to satisfy links

]]>brief `category:people`

-entry for hyperlinking references

brief `category:people`

-entry for hyperlinking references at *primordial nucleosynthesis*

I added the description of lax (co)limits of Cat-valued functors via (co)ends and ordinary (co)limits. I should probably flesh this out more.

I’ve adopted the convention on twisted arrows at twisted arrow category, which is opposite of that in GNN.

In the case of ordinary 2-category, when the diagram category is a 1-category, is the expression of lax (co)limits via ordinary weighted (co)limits really as simple as taking the weights $C_{\bullet/}$ or $C_{/\bullet}$? I can’t find a reference that spells that out clearly; if there really is such a simple description it should be put on the lax (co)limit page.

]]>Changes made only to the Universal property of the 2-category of spans section. The citations by Urs lead to another citation which, in turn, leads to another citation. With a little effort, I tracked down the a full copy of said universal property, I’ve replicated it here, added the citation used, although I left the previous citations there for convenience; a more experienced editor can remove those if they would like.

I would like to note that the author whose work I have referenced, Hermida, also notes: “[this universal property] is folklore although we know no references for it.”

Please make any corrections needed and clean up the language here; this is a fairly direct copy of what is written, but I imagine somebody with more knowledge of all the language used here can rewrite this universal property stuff in a cleaner way.

Thanks!

Anonymous

]]>brief `category:people`

-entry for hyperlinking references

there is an old article (Berends-Gastman 75) that computes the 1-loop corrections due to perturbative quantum gravity to the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron and the muon. The result turns out to be independent of the choice of (“re”-)normalization (hence what they call “finite”).

I have added a remark on this in the $(g-2)$-entry here and also at *quantum gravity* here.

am starting some minimum here. Have been trying to read up on this topic. This will likely become huge towards beginning of next year

]]>Moving the following old query out of the entry to here. Maybe it inspires somebody to add to the entry a remark towards the answer:

[ begin forwarded query ]

+– {: .query} Anonymous: Under what conditions are all injections in a category monomorphisms? Obviously injections are monomorphisms in a well-pointed topos or pretopos (those are models of particular types of set theories), but does that remain true in a (pre)topos without well-pointedness, a coherent category or an exact category?

Anonymous: There is this stackexchange post, but the answers only refer to concrete categories with a forgetful functor to Set and a free functor from Set, rather than arbitrary abstract categories. =–

[ end forwarded query ]

]]>Create a stub.

]]>Added:

The inclusion of the 2-category of monoidal categories into the 2-category of rigid monoidal categories admits a left 2-adjoint functor $L$.

Furthermore, the unit of the adjunction is a strong monoidal fully faithful functor, i.e., any monoidal category $C$ admits a fully faithful strong monoidal functor $C\to L(C)$, where $L(C)$ is a rigid monoidal category.

See Theorems 1 and 2 in Delpeuch \cite{Delpeuch}.

- Antonin Delpeuch,
*Autonomization of monoidal categories*, arXiv, doi.

A page with diagrams representing separation axioms T0-T4 as lifting properties, to be included into the separation axioms.

Anonymous

]]>a bare list of entry names, to be `!include`

-ed into the “Related concepts”-sections of the relevant entries – for ease of cross-linking