Timeline for The semicat of morphisms which are neither right nor left invertible
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:58 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://mathoverflow.net/ with https://mathoverflow.net/
|
|
| Mar 1, 2013 at 20:25 | comment | added | Giorgio Mossa | Just a curiosity, how does a class of morphisms which are neither left nor right invertible be category? identities are always both right and left invertible. | |
| Mar 1, 2013 at 19:01 | history | edited | Salvo Tringali | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added one more question
|
| Mar 1, 2013 at 18:57 | comment | added | Salvo Tringali | I'm not very happy with the term singular for it would tempt me to refer to non-singular arrows as regular, which is already of common use in algebraic geometry. Moreover, considerations similar to those in the OP can be repeated for the class $\mathcal P$ of all $\bf C$-morphism that are neither left nor right cancellative. So then, how to call the latter if the ones from $\mathcal S$ are named singular? I'm editing the OP and add the question to the rest. | |
| Mar 1, 2013 at 18:12 | comment | added | Benjamin Steinberg | People working on finite transformation semigroups sometimes use the term singular. I'm not convinced though that it is widespread. Still I don't have a better name. What do operator theorists say? | |
| Mar 1, 2013 at 16:44 | history | edited | Salvo Tringali | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
It's simply that my English is not as good as my Italian
|
| Mar 1, 2013 at 16:35 | history | asked | Salvo Tringali | CC BY-SA 3.0 |