bio  website  poisson.phc.unipi.it/~mossa 

location  Earth  
age  27  
visits  member for  4 years, 2 months 
seen  16 hours ago  
stats  profile views  1,279 
I'm math student, in particular I'm interested in algebra, geometry, topology and category theory (especially higher dimensional category theory) and its application in mathematics.
18h

comment 
Does every Lawvere theory arise in this way?
Can you give a more detail on what $Lawv(X)$ should be? It should be the smallest finite product subcategory of $\mathbf C$ containing $X$? It should be the smallest finite product category generated by $X$ and its algebraic morphism? 
May 9 
awarded  Yearling 
Apr 29 
awarded  Good Answer 
Feb 20 
answered  The groupoid of algebraic expressions and proofs 
Feb 17 
awarded  Favorite Question 
Dec 5 
answered  Relations between ordinary functor categories and higher categories 
Dec 2 
awarded  Critic 
Nov 9 
awarded  Necromancer 
Jul 2 
answered  Basic category theory: Universality of adjunction unit is justified by Yoneda Proposition in Mac Lane's text 
Jul 2 
comment 
Basic category theory: Universality of adjunction unit is justified by Yoneda Proposition in Mac Lane's text
I don't understand, what you mean by "of course, this is not explicitly defined in general, since it depends on the particular adjunction"? 
Jul 2 
awarded  Curious 
May 21 
comment 
Simple show cases for the Yoneda lemma
@HansStricker what do you mean by $K_1$ and $K_2$ are the representable functors? 
May 21 
comment 
A categorical characterization of ordinal numbers
I guess that for help could be useful to characterize $\star$ by universal property, otherwise is not clear what a category (not necessarily a subcategory of $\mathbf{Cat}$) closed by $\star$ should be. 
May 20 
comment 
A categorical characterization of ordinal numbers
Note that in the note you have linked Joyal define $\star B$ as a functor of type $\mathbf {Cat} \to B\setminus \mathbf {Cat}$ not $\mathbf {Cat} \to \mathbf {Cat}$. 
May 20 
comment 
A categorical characterization of ordinal numbers
The operation $\star$ does not commute with colimit: indeed if that where true then for every limit ordinal $\lambda=\bigcup_{\gamma < \lambda} \gamma$ you should have that $\lambda+1=\lambda\star[0]=\bigcup_{\gamma < \lambda} \gamma\star[0]=\bigcup_{\gamma < \lambda}\gamma+1=\lambda$ things that's not possible since $\lambda$ doesn't have a max while $\lambda+1$ does. 
May 9 
revised 
Further relation between monads and theories
fixed grammar 
May 9 
awarded  Yearling 
Feb 1 
awarded  Popular Question 
Jan 29 
answered  comparison between two monadic definitions for an operad 
Dec 31 
comment 
Is there a precise definition of “mathematical formula”?
I suppose, I actually never studied this stuff by any particular book but used course notes. I believe that all these basic definition can be easily find in course notes of a course in mathematical logic. 