Timeline for Is there a categorification of the integers in terms of "graded sets"?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 31, 2009 at 15:09 | comment | added | Ari | Do you mean that it's boring because every morphism (tangle) ends up being an isomorphism? If so, I wonder if tangles can be generalized so that this is not the case. (For example, one might relax the requirement that each point pairs with exactly one other point.) It would be nice to get the usual FinSet category in the cases where S1 is empty. | |
| Oct 31, 2009 at 3:00 | comment | added | Qiaochu Yuan | Hmm. The categorification you get if you want the morphisms to be invertible is actually extremely boring. That's unfortunate. | |
| Oct 30, 2009 at 23:35 | vote | accept | Qiaochu Yuan | ||
| Oct 30, 2009 at 23:35 | comment | added | Qiaochu Yuan | Perfect! I've read that column but I somehow managed to forget the point of that construction. | |
| Oct 30, 2009 at 23:15 | history | answered | Ari | CC BY-SA 2.5 |