Today I had the following question: "Is the category of continuous functors a cartesian closed subcategory of ${\bf Cat}\ $?" Suppose I want to find an existing reference for this claim. In that case,

**I need to find the result in the literature somehow!**

And for me, that's always hard. I look through some of my category theory books, I look on nlab, I check out wikipedia, and I can't find what I'm looking for. Does that mean the result is not in those places? Absolutely not. I usually take it to mean that I don't have an efficient search strategy. Maybe the result is sitting right there, disguised as "Any lextensive category with strongly orthogonal orbits is quintessentially monoidal", or something that I'm simply not able to "see". Or maybe it's there in plain site, but I just missed it. Why can't we avoid this stupid human error?

The present MO question really has three parts, in ascending order of coolness but descending order of concreteness.

Does anyone know a reference for my category theory claim in quotes above?

Does anyone know of a nice strategy for

*triangulation*in math research? I'd like some way to search for "continuous functors" and "cartesian closed", but wouldn't you know it -- doing that in google returns useless results. How can one use books, the web, etc. to perform the kind of research I'm talking about: finding what's known about your question? E.g. suppose the answer is in a work of Johnstone or Kelly. What techniques would I use to realize that fact, given that I don't know it to begin with?I'd like to hear ideas about the proper structure for the world of mathematical theorems. I'm not looking for an answer such as "It's ${\bf Prop}$, the category of propositions," or anything so simple. Instead, I'm looking for a "strongly searchable" structure in which to store mathematical literature. By strongly searchable, I mean a structure that enables the kind of

*triangulation*I discuss above in 2. This is of course an open-ended question, but perhaps someone has a good idea.

chosenlimits.] If this is how you meant the claim, the problem could be in part that searches failed because the claim is false. $\endgroup$ – Todd Trimble♦ Mar 13 '13 at 1:101more comment