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.
the Day convolution can be described as a left Kan extension of the 'external tensor product' along the tensor product (https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Day+convolution#InTermsOfCoends) . What happens if you take the right Kan extension of the same diagram?
You would get Day convolution for copresheaves (corresponding to free completion of small categories) rather than presheaves (corresponding to free cocompletion of small categories).
say we are in simplicial sets, the Day convolution corresponds to the join operation. Would the right Kan extension do anything interesting to simplicial sets?
The reason Day convolution can be used to define operations on simplicial sets is because simplicial sets form a presheaf category. (Note that the join is Day convolution of ordinal sums: you need to specify which operation you're convolving.) If you wanted to use right Kan extensions, you would need to be interested in a copresheaf category.
@Nathanael Arkor I wouldn't say that. The free completion of a small category is , which is definitely not to be confused with the free cocompletion of .
For simplicial sets, in that linked page, should or
or is this the right diagram image.png
@Zhen Lin Low: thanks, what I meant to say was the objects look the same, but the difference in morphisms is crucial.
Nasos Evangelou-Oost said:
For simplicial sets, in that linked page, should or
It should be . The notation on that page is a little unconventional, I would say.
Because you want an operation on presheaves, i.e. functors .
Ok, but what stops me from taking the right Kan extension there, won't i still be a simplicial set?
is still a monoidal operation on ?
The right Kan extension will give a monoidal structure on , rather than on .
Oh ok, so it would still define an operation on objects but it would turn the morphisms around the wrong way?
Yes: that's the crucial difference between presheaves and copresheaves.
I see now, thanks