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.
Suppose is some class of limit shapes (for example, all countable limits). Let be a category which has all the limits in . Suppose we are given an enrichment of over topological spaces (a topology on each homset so that composition is continuous in the product topology). Then we can ask whether the limits in are compatible with this enrichment, in the sense that the bijection is a homeomorphism (again, giving the right-hand side the topology of the limit in . Call this a compatible enrichment.
Clearly every category admits at least one compatible enrichment, namely the indiscrete one. It's not hard to see that (using Zorn's lemma) there is a maximal compatible enrichment (in the sense of having the most open sets). I'm interested in categories whose maximal such enrichment is Hausdorff (that is, every hom-space is Hausdorff). This is clearly equivalent to the existence of just one compatible Hausdorff enrichment.
This has some non-trivial implications about . For example, suppose is the set of all countable limits. Let be a sequence of maps into a product, writing for the components. Suppose the sequences all stabilize at some point, when . Then these converge, so in any compatible Hausdorff enrichment, also converges to (with components ). Let be any map. Then if for all (that is, this composite is constant), we must also have . But this implication fails in the category of sets.
Clearly one condition that implies this if if every object can be written as a -limit of -cosmall objects (i.e those where a map out of a -limit into them always factors over a projection). But, for example, I think the category of compact Hausdorff spaces has the above property but is not countably cogenerated in this sense.
Does anyone know of previous work studying this property, or an equivalent formulation in terms of "pure" category theory? (I was a bit vague above, but it's fine if is just given by the limits smaller than some regular cardinal.)
You said that the existence of a Hausdorff compatible enrichment implies that a maximal one must be Hausdorff... are you saying that there is a unique maximal one?
My thinking was that the topology generated by the union of two compatible enrichments will itself be compatible, but I can't remember how I convinced myself of that (I guess if it's true, you don't even need Zorn's lemma)
Exactly, that would be a much nicer situation to be in. Even if it isn't true that there is a maximal one, it might be that the kinds of property you've mentioned are enough to guarantee the existence of an enrichment. This seems like a fun problem! What brought you to it?