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: Tensor products as coends


view this post on Zulip Keith Elliott Peterson (Jan 05 2026 at 22:50):

Is the tensor product we all learn about in linear algebra really a coend?

view this post on Zulip Ruby Khondaker (she/her) (Jan 05 2026 at 22:56):

Silly answer - by the right kan extension formula for left adjoints, it should be an end :)

view this post on Zulip fosco (Jan 06 2026 at 09:48):

Yes, it is a coend. A high-level explanation is that a module RMS{}_R M_S is a profunctor M:SopRAbM : S^{op}\otimes R \to Ab and tensor product with SNT{}_S N_T coincides with composition in the appropriate bi-/double-category

view this post on Zulip fosco (Jan 06 2026 at 09:51):

If you don't like this explanation, however, there's a more analytic one. The tensor product is a quotient of MZNM\otimes_{\mathbb Z} N (the tensor product as abelian groups, which is a way bigger module) by the relation that balances scalars in SS imposing (m.s)n=m(s.n)(m.s)\otimes n = m \otimes (s.n).

view this post on Zulip fosco (Jan 06 2026 at 09:52):

As such, it's an instance of the functor tensor product https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/tensor+product+of+functors of this nLab page when C\cal C has a single object.

view this post on Zulip Keith Elliott Peterson (Jan 08 2026 at 22:30):

So bilinearity is actually the "push-pull" quotient one gets from a coend. Neat.

view this post on Zulip Keith Elliott Peterson (Jan 08 2026 at 22:45):

Does it hold that every bimodule/profunctor is given as a colimit of tensor product of functors? That is to say, is there a density theorem for profunctors, just as there are for (co)presheaves?

view this post on Zulip Ruby Khondaker (she/her) (Jan 08 2026 at 23:12):

I guess you have P(a,b)cdHom(a,c)×Hom(d,b)×P(c,d)P(a, b) \cong \int^c \int^d \text{Hom}(a, c) \times \text{Hom}(d, b) \times P(c, d)?

view this post on Zulip Ruby Khondaker (she/her) (Jan 08 2026 at 23:12):

So P(,+)cdHom(,c)×Hom(d,+)×P(c,d)P(-, +) \cong \int^c \int^d \text{Hom}(-, c) \times \text{Hom}(d, +) \times P(c, d)