I would be happy to learn the results which Till Mossakowski has found concerning those situations involving an Adjoint Unity and Identity of Opposites as I discussed in my "Unity and Identity of Opposites in Calculus and Physics",in Applied Categorical Structures vol.4, 167-174, 1996. Two parallel functors are adjointly opposite if they are full and faithful and if there is a third functor left adjoint to one and right adjoint to the other; the two subcategories are opposite as such but identical if one neglects the inclusions. A simple example which I recently noted is even vs odd. That is, taking both the top category and the smaller category to be the poset of natural numbers, let L(n)=2n but R(n)=2n+1. Then the required middle functor exists; a surprising formula for it can be found by solving a third-order linear difference equation. I hope that Till Mossakowski's results may help to compute some other number-theoretic functions that arise by confronting Hegel's Aufhebung idea (or one mathematical version of it) with multi-dimensional combinatorial topology. Consider the set of all such AUIO situations within a fixed top category. This set of "levels" is obviously ordered by any of the three equivalent conditions : L1 belongs to L2, R1 belongs to R2, F2 depends on F1. (Here "belongs" and "depends" just mean the existence of factorizations, but in dual senses). However there is also the stronger relation that L1 might belong to R2; for a given level, there may be a smallest higher level which is strongly higher in that sense, and if so it may be called the Aufhebung of the given level. In case the given containing category is such that the set of all levels is isomorphic to the natural numbers with infinity (the top) and minus infinity (the initial object=L and terminal object=R), then the Aufhebung exists, but the specific function depends on the category. Mike Roy in his 1997 U. of Buffalo thesis studied the topos of ball complexes, finding in particular that both Aufhebung and coAufhebung exist and that they are both equal to the successor function on dimensions. Still not calculated is that function for the topos of presheaves on the category of nonempty finite sets. This category is important logically because the presheaf represented by 2 is generic among all Boolean algebra objects in all toposes defined over the same base topos of sets, and topologically because of its close relation with classical simplicial complexes. Here the levels or dimensions just correspond to those subcategories of finite sets that are closed under retract. It is easy to see that the Aufhebung of dimension 0 (the one point set) is dimension 1 (the two-point set and its retracts), but what is the general formula ? ************************************************************ F. William Lawvere Mathematics Department, State University of New York 244 Mathematics Building, Buffalo, N.Y. 14260-2900 USA Tel. 716-645-6284 HOMEPAGE: http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~wlawvere ************************************************************
In this discussion of adjoint cylinders, I haven't noticed anyone pointing out that when L --| F --| R, then FL = Id (I use = for natural equivalence here) iff FR = Id. Dusko told me earlier this year that it was in his thesis, but I would not be surprised if it were older than that. Here is a simple proof. Let eta: Id --> FL be the inner adjunction of L --| F and epsilon: FR --> Id be the outer adjunction of F --| R. Then if alpha F means apply F,the composites alpha F Hom(eta-,F-) Hom(L-,-) -------> Hom(FL-,F-) ------------> Hom(-,F-) alpha F Hom(F-,epsilon-) Hom(-,R-) -------> Hom(F-,FR-) ----------------> Hom(F-,-) are isomorphisms. Then there is a commutative square (both composites are Hom(eta-,epsilon -) o alpha F): Hom(eta-,FR-) o alpha F Hom(L-,R-) ------------------------> Hom(-,FR-) | | | | | | | | Hom(FL-,epsilon-) o alpha F Hom(-,epsilon-) | | | | | | v Hom(eta,-) v Hom(FL,-) -------------------------> Hom(-,-) in which the upper and left hand maps are isomorphisms and it follows that the bottom arrow is an isomorphism iff the right hand one is.
Mike Barr wrote:
In this discussion of adjoint cylinders, I haven't noticed anyone pointing out that when L --| F --| R, then FL = Id (I use = for natural equivalence here) iff FR = Id. Dusko told me earlier this year that it was in his thesis, but I would not be surprised if it were older than that. Here is a simple proof....
Here is an even simpler one: FL is left adjoint to FR, by composability of adjoints; the identity functor is left adjoint to itself. Peter Johnstone
I had an idea and I'd like to know whether you like it and some advice on making it work if you do. There are quite a few interesting tales about category theorists around. I think it will be a shame to lose this more human history as time passes and us newer category theorists can't completely remember the stories.... So I'd like to set up a kind of archive - a sort of myths and legends of the category theorists (but preferably more truth than myth!). This is the plan so far (assuming you think this is not a terrible idea). Format: An email-style archive with tales/histories/mini-biographies submitted by email in plain text and linked to from a page of titles (titles would include rough dates, authors and characters - which would make it easily searchable so you can easily read about your particular heroes!). Procedure: Email sent to me which would have to be accepted by every living character in the story (for obvious reasons). Some procedure should be agreed for the acceptance of stories about people no longer alive. The best stories, I guess, will be those people write about themselves. This is just an idea, I hope you will let me know whether you approve. --Anne. ----- Have you visited www.thehungersite.com and www.therainforestsite.com today? -----
participants (4)
-
Dr Anne Heyworth -
Dr. P.T. Johnstone -
F W Lawvere -
Michael Barr