From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.science.mathematics.categories/3703
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Paul Taylor <pt@cs.man.ac.uk>
Newsgroups: gmane.science.mathematics.categories
Subject: functions and polynomials
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 11:06:44 +0000
Message-ID: <E1HU2TG-0001Oc-PE@mailserv.mta.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org
X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1241019471 9891 80.91.229.2 (29 Apr 2009 15:37:51 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 15:37:51 +0000 (UTC)
To: categories@mta.ca
Original-X-From: rrosebru@mta.ca Wed Mar 21 12:20:58 2007 -0300
Return-path: <cat-dist@mta.ca>
Envelope-to: categories-list@mta.ca
Delivery-date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 12:20:58 -0300
Original-Received: from Majordom by mailserv.mta.ca with local (Exim 4.61)
	(envelope-from <cat-dist@mta.ca>)
	id 1HU2TG-0001Oc-PE
	for categories-list@mta.ca; Wed, 21 Mar 2007 12:11:26 -0300
Original-Sender: cat-dist@mta.ca
Precedence: bulk
X-Keywords: 
X-UID: 57
Original-Lines: 49
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.science.mathematics.categories:3703
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.mathematics.categories/3703>

How widely applicable is the following idea?

Let  f: Z x Z -> Z  be a binary FUNCTION (in the sense of sets)
on the integers, with the property that

 - for each x:Z,  f(x,-) : Z -> Z is a (agrees with a unique)
   POLYNOMIAL, whose coefficients are functions of x; and similarly

 - for each y:Z,  f(-,y) : Z -> Z is also a polynomial.

Then  f(x,y)  was itself a polynomial in two variables.


This generalises to a disjoint union of sets of variables,
ie to functions   Z^X x Z^Y -> Z   that are polynomials in one
set of variables for each value of the other, and vice versa.


The (possible) categorical generalisation is this:

Let T be a strong monad on a topos, CCC or even a symmetric monoidal
closed category, and K=T0 its free algebra.   Then there is a natural
transformation
    r_X:  T X --->  K^(K^X),
which we suppose to be mono.  (How widely is this the case?)

Then the above result states that (in that case) the square

                            (K^Y)
    T (X + Y) >---------> TX
       V      |              V
       |      |              |
       | -----               |     K^Y
       |                     | r_X
       |           K^X       |
       V        r_Y          V
        (K^X) >-------->  (K^X x K^Y)
      TY                 K

is a pullback (in fact, an intersection).

I am primarily concerned with the case where T encodes the theory
of frames over either Set or Dcpo, though if the result extends to
commutative rings or other algebraic theories, that would be very
interesting too.

Paul Taylor