7
$\begingroup$

In a category $\mathcal{C}$, a generalized element of an object $A$ means a morphism to $A$. It follows from Yoneda lemma that the object $A$ is determined by the collection of generalized of elements of $A$.

In a monoidal category $(\mathcal{C},\otimes)$, it seems more natural to consider generalized elements of a tensor product $A\otimes B$ in the form $a\otimes b$, meaning a tensor product of two morphisms, one to $A$, another to $B$. So, my first questions are

  1. Is the tensor product $A\otimes B$ determined by generalized elements of the form $a\otimes b$?
  2. Let $f,g\colon A\otimes B\to C$ be two morphisms. If for all generalized elements of the form $a\otimes b$, the compositions $f(a\otimes b)=g(a\otimes b)$, is it true that $f=g$?

In nLab, it mentioned that generalized elements of the form $I\to A$, where $I$ is the tensor unit, is important in the theory of enriched category. However, the functor $A\mapsto\mathrm{Hom}(I,A)$ may not be full or faithful. Hence those generalized elements cannot determine the objects or morphisms in general. So

  1. Why generalized elements of the form $I\to A$ important in enriched category theory regardless its application to define underlying categories?
$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

If I'm not wrong, the following is an answer to 2.

For any objects $A,B,C$ of $\mathcal{C}$, we have the following natural map \begin{align} \Phi\colon\mathrm{Hom}(A\otimes B,C) &\to \mathrm{Nat}(h_A\boxtimes h_B,h_C\circ\otimes) \\ f &\mapsto f\circ- \end{align} where

  • $h_A\boxtimes h_B$ denotes the functor $\mathcal{C}\times\mathcal{C}\to\mathrm{Set}$ mapping each pair of objects $S,T$ of $\mathcal{C}$ to the set $\mathrm{Hom}(S,A)\times\mathrm{Hom}(T,B)$;
  • $h_C\circ\otimes$ denotes the functor $\mathcal{C}\times\mathcal{C}\to\mathrm{Set}$ mapping each pair of objects $S,T$ of $\mathcal{C}$ to the set $\mathrm{Hom}(S\otimes T,C)$;
  • $f\circ-$ means mapping each pair $a\colon S\to A, b\colon T\to B$ to the composition $f(a\otimes b)$.

On the other hand, by the definition of End, we have (each "$=$" means a canonical isomorphism) \begin{align} \mathrm{Nat}(h_A\boxtimes h_B,h_C\circ\otimes) &= \int_{(S,T)\in\mathrm{ob}\mathcal{C}\times\mathcal{C}}\mathrm{Map}(\mathrm{Hom}(S,A)\times\mathrm{Hom}(T,B),\mathrm{Hom}(S\otimes T,C)) \\ &= \int_{S\in\mathrm{ob}\mathcal{C}}\int_{T\in\mathrm{ob}\mathcal{C}} \mathrm{Map}(\mathrm{Hom}(S,A)\times\mathrm{Hom}(T,B),\mathrm{Hom}(S\otimes T,C)) & (\text{by Fubini theorem})\\ &= \int_{T\in\mathrm{ob}\mathcal{C}}\int_{S\in\mathrm{ob}\mathcal{C}} \mathrm{Map}(\mathrm{Hom}(S,A)\times\mathrm{Hom}(T,B),\mathrm{Hom}(S\otimes T,C)) & (\text{since $\mathrm{Set}$ is symmetric monoidal})\\ &= \int_{T\in\mathrm{ob}\mathcal{C}}\int_{S\in\mathrm{ob}\mathcal{C}} \mathrm{Map}(\mathrm{Hom}(S,A),\mathrm{Map}(\mathrm{Hom}(T,B),\mathrm{Hom}(S\otimes T,C))) \\ &= \int_{T\in\mathrm{ob}\mathcal{C}} \mathrm{Nat}(h_A,\mathrm{Map}(\mathrm{Hom}(T,B),\mathrm{Hom}(-\otimes T,C))) \\ &= \int_{T\in\mathrm{ob}\mathcal{C}} \mathrm{Map}(\mathrm{Hom}(T,B),\mathrm{Hom}(A\otimes T,C)) & (\text{by Yoneda lemma}) \\ &= \mathrm{Nat}(h_B,\mathrm{Hom}(A\otimes -,C)) \\ &= \mathrm{Hom}(A\otimes B,C)& (\text{by Yoneda lemma again}) \end{align} By trace the canonical isomorphism involved, the above gives the inverse of $\Phi$. The bijectivity of $\Phi$ implies 2 as desired.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.