Timeline for Adjunctions form a stack
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:57 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://mathoverflow.net/ with https://mathoverflow.net/
|
|
| Jun 28, 2011 at 0:45 | answer | added | David Carchedi | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jun 26, 2011 at 22:16 | answer | added | Mike Shulman | timeline score: 7 | |
| Jun 26, 2011 at 8:58 | vote | accept | Martin Brandenburg | ||
| Jun 28, 2011 at 0:09 | |||||
| Jun 26, 2011 at 3:51 | answer | added | user2490 | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jun 25, 2011 at 22:16 | answer | added | Finn Lawler | timeline score: 4 | |
| Jun 25, 2011 at 22:10 | comment | added | Michal R. Przybylek | As Finn has pointed out, you have to assume a suitable stability condition (i.e. the Beck-Chevalley condition). Intuitively, to see why such a condition is necessary, recall that (split) fibrations together with cartesian functors and cartesian transformations are "the same" as Cat-valued functors with natural transformations, and modifications between them --- so, the fibrational viewpoint has to reflect the coherence conditions from the later setting. | |
| Jun 25, 2011 at 16:31 | comment | added | Finn Lawler | If you think of F and G as functors into Cat, then the obvious candidates for the naturality squares of $G \to F$ are the mates of those for $F \to G$, but they won't be invertible in general, so you're probably looking for a Beck--Chevalley condition of that sort. You might get a(n op)lax transformation for free, though. | |
| Jun 25, 2011 at 15:27 | history | edited | Martin Brandenburg | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 130 characters in body
|
| Jun 25, 2011 at 15:22 | history | asked | Martin Brandenburg | CC BY-SA 3.0 |