3
$\begingroup$

For categories $\mathcal{C}$ and $\mathcal{D}$, a pair of functors $\mathcal{C} \xrightarrow{\;L\;} \mathcal{D}$ and $\mathcal{C} \xleftarrow{\;R\;} \mathcal{D}\,$ are an adjoint pair if we have natural transformations $\eta \colon 1_\mathcal{C} \Rightarrow RL$ and $\varepsilon \colon LR \Rightarrow 1_\mathcal{D}$, called the unit and counit respectively, that satisfy the triangle identities.

On the other hand, a Hopf algebra $H$ is an associative and coassociative bialgebra equipped with a multiplication $\nabla$, a comultiplication $\Delta$, an antipode $S$, and unit and counit maps $\eta$ and $\varepsilon$ such that $\nabla \circ (1_H \otimes S) \circ \Delta = \Delta \circ (S \otimes 1_H) \circ \nabla = \eta\circ \varepsilon$.

How are these two different definitions of unit/counit related? I mean, I know they must be the same idea when viewed in the right context, but I haven't figured it out yet, and neither nLab nor Wikipedia spells it out. I'm sure I could figure this out myself eventually and type up an nice answer (and will if no one else feels like typing it up), but I'll bet someone on this site already knows the relationship well and can provide some useful insight too.

$\endgroup$
6
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ How do you know that they must be the same idea? $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 10, 2018 at 20:00
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I don't think they're closely related. The unit/counit of a Frobenius algebra, on the other hand, is somewhat related to adjunctions because LR is a Frobenius monad when L and R are biadjoint. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 10, 2018 at 20:04
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ There is a general notion of algebra or coalgebra object in a monoidal categeory. Algebras have units (at least the unital ones do) and coalgebras have counits. A Hopf algebra is both an algebra and a coalgebra object in vector spaces. On the other hand, an adunction gives rise to a monad (and a comonad) which are (co)algebra objects in a category of endofunctors - the (co)unit mentioned above is part of this structure. So in this sense they are both examples of a more general notion. I'm not sure if there is anything much deeper than that though. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 10, 2018 at 21:24
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Plus mentioning that you can make a Hopf monad too. $\endgroup$
    – AHusain
    Commented Oct 10, 2018 at 23:01
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Right, there is such a thing as a Hopf monad, but they don't have anything to do with adjoint functors. Biadjoint functors give a Frobenius monad but not a Hopf monad. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 11, 2018 at 1:44

0

You must log in to answer this question.