For two categories let denote the functor category, whose objects are functors and whose morphisms are natural transformations. For a locally small category, the Yoneda embedding is the functor sending an object to the contravariant functor and sending a morphism to the natural transformation given by composition. The goal of the next few posts is [...]
Archive for the ‘order theory’ Category
The Yoneda lemma I
Posted in algebraic geometry, category theory, order theory, tagged abstract nonsense on April 2, 2012 | 4 Comments »
Ultrafilters in topology
Posted in logic and set theory, order theory, probability, topology, tagged compactness, ultrafilters on December 9, 2010 | 4 Comments »
Remark: To forestall empty set difficulties, whenever I talk about arbitrary sets in this post they will be non-empty. We continue our exploration of ultrafilters from the previous post. Recall that a (proper) filter on a poset is a non-empty subset such that For every , there is some such that . For every , [...]
Boolean rings, ultrafilters, and Stone’s representation theorem
Posted in category theory, commutative algebra, logic and set theory, order theory, topology, tagged adjoint functors, axiom of choice, duality, ultrafilters, universal properties on November 22, 2010 | 8 Comments »
Recently, I have begun to appreciate the use of ultrafilters to clean up proofs in certain areas of mathematics. I’d like to talk a little about how this works, but first I’d like to give a hefty amount of motivation for the definition of an ultrafilter. Terence Tao has already written a great introduction to [...]
The adjoint functor theorem for posets
Posted in category theory, order theory, tagged abstract nonsense, adjoint functors, universal properties, Yoneda lemma on October 22, 2010 | 3 Comments »
Recently in Measure Theory we needed the following lemma. Lemma: Let be non-constant, right-continuous and non-decreasing, and let . Define by . Then is left-continuous and non-decreasing. Moreover, for and , . If you’re categorically minded, this last condition should remind you of the definition of a pair of adjoint functors. In fact it is [...]
Lattice paths and the quadratic coefficient of Kazhdan-Lusztig polynomials
Posted in order theory, representation theory, tagged Kazhdan-Lusztig on July 31, 2010 | 2 Comments »
SPUR is finally over! Instead of continuing my series of blog posts, I thought I’d just link to my paper, Lattice paths and the quadratic coefficient of Kazhdan-Lusztig polynomials, and the first few blog posts should more or less provide enough background to read it. My project ended up changing direction. The formula I was [...]
Chevalley-Bruhat order
Posted in algebraic combinatorics, linear algebra, order theory, tagged Bruhat decomposition, Coxeter groups on July 11, 2010 | Leave a Comment »
Before we define Bruhat order, I’d like to say a few things by way of motivation. Warning: I know nothing about algebraic groups, so take everything I say with a grain of salt. A (maximal) flag in a vector space of dimension is a chain of subspaces such that . The flag variety of is, [...]
The “correct” definition of a homomorphism
Posted in category theory, order theory, topology, tagged abstract nonsense, contravariant functors, duality, equivalence relations, Hom functors on August 8, 2009 | 15 Comments »
(Warning: I’m trying to talk about things I don’t really understand in this post, so feel free to correct me if you see a statement that’s obviously wrong.) Why are continuous functions the “correct” notion of homomorphism between topological spaces? The “obvious” way to define homomorphisms for a large class of objects involves thinking of [...]