From: Jeff Egger <jeffegger@yahoo.ca>
To: John Baez <john.c.baez@gmail.com>, categories <categories@mta.ca>,
Subject: Re: bilax_monoidal_functors
Date: Sat, 15 May 2010 09:54:21 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <E1ODfO3-0006cj-EC@mailserv.mta.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1OBzhU-0007X1-2F@mailserv.mta.ca>
>> But I think "braided = doubly monoidal" is even
> > better. After all, a
> > monoidal category has one tensor product; a braided
> > monoidal category has
> > two compatible tensor products, and a symmetric
> > monoidal category has three.
>
> The trouble is that n-monoidal categories already exist.
> They were
> introduced my Balteanu, Fioderowicz, Shwantzl and Vogt.
> This is why I
> also see n-tuply monoidal as confusing. I do not say that
> they sound
> identical but certainly very close to each other.
This is a strong point. Obviously n-tuply monoidal category
should mean category with n "compatible" monoidal structures;
but there many possible meanings of "compatible". One choice
leads to a single monoidal structure with an (n-1)-braiding;
but a different choice leads to the notion of BFSV. In fact,
I think that even the BFSV notion is too strict---it forces
all the units to be the same, where I think one should allow
them to be different (in general). That is, I think it would
be reasonable to use "doubly monoidal category" to mean
(pseudo)monoid internal to LAX (rather than STRONG, or even
NORMAL).
Cheers,
Jeff.
[For admin and other information see: http://www.mta.ca/~cat-dist/ ]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-05-15 16:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-05-08 3:27 RE : bilax monoidal functors John Baez
2010-05-09 10:38 ` autonomous terminology: WAS: " Dusko Pavlovic
2010-05-09 22:41 ` Colin McLarty
2010-05-10 12:09 ` posina
2010-05-10 17:40 ` Jeff Egger
2010-05-09 16:26 ` bilax_monoidal_functors?= Andre Joyal
2010-05-10 14:58 ` bilax_monoidal_functors?= Eduardo J. Dubuc
2010-05-10 19:28 ` bilax_monoidal_functors Jeff Egger
2010-05-13 17:17 ` bilax_monoidal_functors Michael Shulman
2010-05-14 14:43 ` terminology (was: bilax_monoidal_functors) Peter Selinger
2010-05-15 19:52 ` terminology Toby Bartels
2010-05-15 1:05 ` bilax_monoidal_functors Andre Joyal
[not found] ` <20100514144324.D83A35C275@chase.mathstat.dal.ca>
2010-05-15 4:41 ` terminology (was: bilax_monoidal_functors) Michael Shulman
2010-05-10 10:28 ` bilax monoidal functors Urs Schreiber
2010-05-11 3:17 ` bilax_monoidal_functors Andre Joyal
[not found] ` <4BE81F26.4020903@dm.uba.ar>
2010-05-10 18:16 ` bilax_monoidal_functors?= John Baez
2010-05-11 1:04 ` bilax_monoidal_functors?= Michael Shulman
2010-05-12 20:02 ` calculus, homotopy theory and more Andre Joyal
[not found] ` <B3C24EA955FF0C4EA14658997CD3E25E370F57F6@CAHIER.gst.uqam.ca>
[not found] ` <B3C24EA955FF0C4EA14658997CD3E25E370F57F8@CAHIER.gst.uqam.ca>
2010-05-13 6:56 ` calculus, homotopy theory and more (corrected) Michael Batanin
[not found] ` <B3C24EA955FF0C4EA14658997CD3E25E370F57FE@CAHIER.gst.uqam.ca>
2010-05-13 22:59 ` Michael Batanin
[not found] ` <4BEC846B.5050000@ics.mq.edu.au>
2010-05-14 2:53 ` Andre Joyal
2010-05-11 8:28 ` bilax_monoidal_functors?= Michael Batanin
2010-05-12 3:02 ` bilax_monoidal_functors?= Toby Bartels
2010-05-13 23:09 ` bilax_monoidal_functors?= Michael Batanin
2010-05-15 16:05 ` terminology Joyal, André
[not found] ` <4BEC8698.3090408@ics.mq.edu.au>
2010-05-14 18:41 ` bilax_monoidal_functors? Toby Bartels
2010-05-15 16:54 ` Jeff Egger [this message]
2010-05-14 14:34 ` bilax_monoidal_functors Michael Shulman
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-05-15 16:23 bilax_monoidal_functors Jeff Egger
2010-05-11 1:04 bilax_monoidal_functors Fred E.J. Linton
2010-05-08 1:05 bilax monoidal functors David Yetter
2010-05-07 18:03 John Baez
2010-05-08 2:23 ` Andre Joyal
2010-05-08 23:11 ` Michael Batanin
2010-05-10 16:12 ` Toby Bartels
[not found] ` <4BE5EF9C.1060907@ics.mq.edu.au>
2010-05-08 23:34 ` John Baez
2010-05-08 9:38 ` Steve Lack
[not found] ` <C80B6E26.B13C%s.lack@uws.edu.au>
2010-05-08 23:19 ` John Baez
2010-05-06 23:02 Q. about " Steve Lack
2010-05-07 14:59 ` bilax " Joyal, André
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=E1ODfO3-0006cj-EC@mailserv.mta.ca \
--to=jeffegger@yahoo.ca \
--cc=categories@mta.ca \
--cc=john.c.baez@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).