MathOverflow will be down for maintenance for approximately 3 hours, starting Monday evening (06/24/2013) at approximately 9:00 PM Eastern time (UTC-4).
show/hide this revision's text 2 Clarified the text.

I've been reading some "introduction to categories" type materials and have been impressed with the all-encompassing nature, but the skeptic in me wonders: is there any mathematical object that categories can't describe? Is

To be quite specific, I'd be interested any of these:

a.) Objects that can be described by categories that have properties that can't.

b.) Category equivalents of set-theoretic type limits, like how "the set of all sets" causes problems.

c.) Some type of mathematics so pathological it possiblefoils, even in a wildly artificial contextsay, associativity. It doesn't need to create be a Gödel-like barrier?mathematics that's useful in any sense, just one designed specifically to be impossible to describe with categories.

show/hide this revision's text 1

What can't be described by categories?

I've been reading some "introduction to categories" type materials and have been impressed with the all-encompassing nature, but the skeptic in me wonders: is there any mathematical object that categories can't describe? Is it possible, even in a wildly artificial context, to create a Gödel-like barrier?