Category Theory
Zulip Server
Archive

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.


Stream: learning: questions

Topic: Monoidal category question


view this post on Zulip John Baez (Jul 24 2024 at 22:52):

@Jean-Baptiste Vienney raised a fun question which I posted to MathOverflow. Check it out:

view this post on Zulip John Baez (Jul 24 2024 at 22:54):

I think I've answered it: yes. Let me test out the answer on you folks.

First think about the category of affine spaces over some field. This famously has both a cartesian monoidal structure ×\times and a semicartesian monoidal structure \otimes: the latter is explained here.

view this post on Zulip John Baez (Jul 24 2024 at 22:57):

Let's look at the full subcategory C\mathsf{C} of affine spaces that are either terminal (the one-element affine space) or of countably infinite dimension, by which I mean they're a coproduct of a countably infinite number of copies of the terminal affine space. I claim that for all objects A,BCA, B \in \mathsf{C} we have

ABA×B A \otimes B \cong A \times B

view this post on Zulip John Baez (Jul 24 2024 at 22:58):

I also claim C\mathsf{C} is a monoidal subcategory with respect to either ×\times or \otimes: for example, the cartesian or tensor product of two affine spaces of countably infinite dimension again has countably infinite dimension.

view this post on Zulip John Baez (Jul 24 2024 at 23:01):

Now take a skeleton S\mathsf{S} of C\mathsf{C}. We can transfer both the ×\times and \otimes monoidal structures from C\mathsf{C} to this skeleton, and since we had

ABA×BA \otimes B \cong A \times B in C\mathsf{C}

we have

AB=A×B A \otimes B = A \times B in S\mathsf{S}

Concretely, C\mathsf{C} has just two objects, the terminal object 11 and the affine space of countably infinite dimension, xx. These have

1×x=x×1=x,x×x=x1 \times x = x \times 1 = x, x \times x = x

and also

1x=x1=x,xx=x 1 \otimes x = x \otimes 1 = x, x \otimes x = x

view this post on Zulip John Baez (Jul 24 2024 at 23:05):

To finish the proof we just need to check that (S,,1)(S, \otimes, 1) is not cartesian monoidal. I need to check that more carefully. However, it would seem amazing if the non-cartesian tensor product \otimes of affine spaces were cartesian on affine spaces of countably infinite dimension!

view this post on Zulip Jean-Baptiste Vienney (Jul 24 2024 at 23:53):

I don’t understand from the nLab what’s the tensor product of two affine spaces? And of two affine maps?

view this post on Zulip Jean-Baptiste Vienney (Jul 25 2024 at 00:09):

Ok, now I see that I must learn what is the tensor product of two algebras for a commutative algebraic theory and this will just be an instance of this: really nice.

view this post on Zulip John Baez (Jul 25 2024 at 06:32):

The nLab link I gave describes the tensor product of two finite-dimensional affine spaces quite explicitly, and the same basic idea works in general. We get this description using the fact that

1) every affine space is free on some set XX, so call it F(X)F(X)
2) F(X)F(Y)F(X×Y)F(X) \otimes F(Y) \cong F(X \times Y)

This should remind you immensely of how vector spaces work. But you have to adjust your intuitions a bit, remembering that in an affine space we can only form affine combinations, not more general linear combinations, and in particular an affine space doesn't have an element called 00.

Thus, the free vector space on \emptyset has one point, while the free affine space on \emptyset is empty. Similarly the free vector space on 11 is kk (your chosen field), while the free affine space on 11 is a one-element set. The free vector space on 22 is k2k^2, while the free affine space on 22 is a line containing the two points of 22. The free vector space on 33 is k3k^3, while the free affine space on 33 is a plane containing the three points of 33, which form the vertices of a triangle. And so on.

view this post on Zulip John Baez (Jul 25 2024 at 08:25):

Using this idea (which extends to the free affine space on an infinite set) and 2), we can understand a lot about the tensor product of affine spaces.

view this post on Zulip Martti Karvonen (Jul 25 2024 at 08:38):

Is there a reason you start from affine spaces? It seems to me that you could've done the same construction on vector spaces and still get a seemingly plausible example of what you're after.

view this post on Zulip John Baez (Jul 25 2024 at 11:18):

Affine spaces are known to have a semicartesian tensor product \otimes that's not cartesian, so the unit object for \otimes is the terminal object, so it's same as the unit object for ×\times.

Vector spaces don't have any semicartesian tensor product that I know of: in particular, the unit object for the usual \otimes of vector spaces is not the terminal vector space.

view this post on Zulip John Baez (Jul 25 2024 at 11:27):

So, my plan was this: start with the category of affine spaces with its two tensor products \otimes and ×\times. They share the same unit object. Next, try to make them equal on all objects. The two different tensor products of finite-dimensional affine spaces aren't isomorphic since they have different dimension. But:

view this post on Zulip John Baez (Jul 25 2024 at 11:29):

So let's consider the full subcategory C\mathsf{C} of the category of affine spaces consisting only of terminal and countably-infinite-dimensional affine spaces! For any objects A,BCA, B \in \mathsf{C} we have

A×BABA \times B \cong A \otimes B

Further, C\mathsf{C} is a monoidal subcategory of Aff\mathrm{Aff} under either \otimes or ×\times, since the product or tensor product of two affine spaces of countably infinite dimension again has countably infinite dimension.

(This is easy to see in terms of bases. To get a basis of A×BA \times B we take the disjoint union of a basis of AA and a basis of BB. To get a basis of ABA \otimes B we take the cartesian product of a basis of AA and a basis of BB.)

Now let S\mathsf{S} be a skeleton of C\mathsf{C}. Now isomorphic objects become equal, so we get

A×B=ABA \times B = A \otimes B

for all objects of S\mathsf{S}.

view this post on Zulip Martti Karvonen (Jul 25 2024 at 13:02):

John Baez said:

Affine spaces are known to have a semicartesian tensor product \otimes that's not cartesian, so the unit object for \otimes is the terminal object, so it's same as the unit object for ×\times.

Vector spaces don't have any semicartesian tensor product that I know of: in particular, the unit object for the usual \otimes of vector spaces is not the terminal vector space.

Oh yeah of course, I was just thinking of the two monoidal products coinciding in the countable case but forgot about being semicartesian.