* Poset adjoints
@ 2014-04-16 6:51 Vasili I. Galchin
2014-04-17 15:36 ` Harley D. Eades III
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Vasili I. Galchin @ 2014-04-16 6:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Categories mailing list
Hello Category Community,
Given that poset adjoints are considered miniature versions of
adjoints, what are are the unit and co-unit natural transformations
say between poset A and B?
Kind regards,
Vasili
[For admin and other information see: http://www.mta.ca/~cat-dist/ ]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Poset adjoints
2014-04-16 6:51 Poset adjoints Vasili I. Galchin
@ 2014-04-17 15:36 ` Harley D. Eades III
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Harley D. Eades III @ 2014-04-17 15:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Vasili I. Galchin; +Cc: Categories mailing list
Hi, Vasili.
On Apr 16, 2014, at 1:51 AM, Vasili I. Galchin <vigalchin@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello Category Community,
>
> Given that poset adjoints are considered miniature versions of
> adjoints, what are are the unit and co-unit natural transformations
> say between poset A and B?
Doesn't this boil down to a Galois connection? The unit and counit would
then be:
f(y) <= x iff y <= g(x)
where f : B -> A and G : A -> B and x in A and y in B.
Very best,
.\ Harley
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Vasili
>
[For admin and other information see: http://www.mta.ca/~cat-dist/ ]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Poset adjoints
@ 2014-04-17 5:26 Fred E.J. Linton
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Fred E.J. Linton @ 2014-04-17 5:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Vasili I. Galchin; +Cc: categories
Properly posed, Vasili's question should be not
> Given that poset adjoints are considered miniature versions of
> adjoints, what are are the unit and co-unit natural transformations
> say between poset A and B?
but:
: Given order-preserving functions r: A --> B and l: B --> A between
: posets A and B, with r right adjoint to l, what are the unit and
: co-unit natural transformations 1_B ==> rl and lr ==> 1_A ?
And the answer, as always, is that 1_B: b --> rlb (for b in B) is
the order relation b < rlb that adjointness correlates to lb < lb,
while 1_A: lra --> a (for a in A) is the order relation lra < a
that adjointness correlates to ra < ra.
(Above I'm writing simply < for the (reflexive, transitive) order relation
on either of the two posets.)
HTH. Cheers, -- Fred
[For admin and other information see: http://www.mta.ca/~cat-dist/ ]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-04-17 15:36 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-04-16 6:51 Poset adjoints Vasili I. Galchin
2014-04-17 15:36 ` Harley D. Eades III
2014-04-17 5:26 Fred E.J. Linton
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).