You're reading the public-facing archive of the Category Theory Zulip server.
To join the server you need an invite. Anybody can get an invite by contacting Matteo Capucci at name dot surname at gmail dot com.
For all things related to this archive refer to the same person.
Composition of profunctors is normally defined by a coend , a sum over with a quotient by its action . But what if we just defined to be triples of morphisms ? This seems to be an equivalent notion of composite, without needing any quotienting. It seems like the "coYoneda-expanded" form of composition. What's going on?
Thinking of profunctors as discrete two-sided fibrations , the composite span is a two-sided fibration consisting of these triples .
So why quotient at all? Just to collapse to a normal form of pairs ?
Oh, maybe this is about representing a virtual double category.
but the "expanded" composite span seems to be a composite in that sense as well.
So I'm wondering, why not define to be a sum over morphisms rather than objects?
It seems simpler, because no quotient is needed.
Well, to start with, that sort of composition wouldn't have identities...
Ah, yes of course.
Thanks. It felt too good to be true, but I couldn't see the problem.
the archetypal 'identity crisis' :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:
Matteo Capucci (he/him) said:
the archetypal 'identity crisis' :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:
Initial object in the category of identity crises