Skip to main content
6 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Feb 8, 2011 at 2:30 comment added Tyler Lawson Actually, your side commentary is quite interesting. There are some monads in topology that require cofibrant input to be homotopically sensible, but typically will not produce cofibrant output. Having a more canonical version of cofibrant or fibrant replacement would be quite helpful.
Feb 7, 2011 at 21:43 comment added Richard Garner The point I really wanted to make, had my head been screwed on correctly, was that for an algebraic w.f.s., one obtains a natural transformation G --> G o G (by lifting) which is a section of the two projections G o G --> G, and moreover coassociative in the obvious sense. It is this transformation, which, for an ordinary w.f.s., would fail to be natural (or coassociative).
Feb 7, 2011 at 6:00 comment added Richard Garner @Harry - one can always exponentiate a category equipped with an algebraic WFS by a small category, and again obtain a category equipped with an algebraic WFS. Whether or not this is a useful thing to do is another question. The WFS one obtains in this way is neither the injective nor the projective one; and even if the original one was cofibrantly generated, the induced WFS will typically not be, at least not in the classical sense.
Feb 7, 2011 at 5:56 comment added Richard Garner Sorry, what I wrote above seems to be complete rubbish. There is a perfectly good natural transformation G o F --> G under no assumptions at all, using only the functoriality of G.
Feb 7, 2011 at 5:31 comment added Harry Gindi Dear Richard, are these algebraic notions compatible with exponentiation by small categories (That is, is this natural/algebraic WFS theory is an alternative to the theory of combinatoriality introduced by Jeff Smith)?
Feb 7, 2011 at 5:22 history answered Richard Garner CC BY-SA 2.5