6
$\begingroup$

The category $PrL$ of locally presentable categories has all colimits. In particular, if $A_1 \leftarrow A_0 \rightarrow A_2$ is a diagram of presentable categories, with left adjoint functors between them, then the pushout $A_1 \coprod_{A_0} A_2$ in $PrL$ exists and the pushout functors $A_1 \rightarrow A_1 \coprod_{A_0} A_2, A_2 \rightarrow A_1 \coprod_{A_0} A_2$ are morphisms in $PrL$ and hence are left adjoints.

I am wondering whether this generalizes to categories that are not locally presentable. Concretely, if $A_1 \leftarrow A_0 \rightarrow A_2$ is a diagram of categories (maybe not presentable) with left adjoint functors between them, we can form the pushout $A_1 \coprod_{A_0} A_2$ in $Cat$.

Question: Are the pushout functors $A_1 \rightarrow A_1 \coprod_{A_0} A_2$ and $A_2 \rightarrow A_1 \coprod_{A_0} A_2$ also left adjoints?

If the answer is no in general, are there additional conditions on the diagram $A_1 \leftarrow A_0 \rightarrow A_2$ that imply that the answer is yes?

This question Pushouts in the category of adjunctions is relevant but I think does not answer my question since I am not interested in pushouts in the category of adjunctions $Cat^{Adj}$, which I think does not have all pushouts by the answers there.

Remark: I am thinking about this question for $\infty$-categories and $Cat$ means that $\infty$-category of $\infty$-categories. It might be useful to consider $Cat$ as an $(\infty, 2)$-category but I am not sure.

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
3
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ The answer is presumably “no”. Even if it were “yes”, this would not be a generalization of the fact in $Pr^L$ because the forgetful functor $Pr^L \to Cat$ does not preserve pushouts. $\endgroup$
    – Tim Campion
    Commented May 28 at 14:53
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ To precise Tim's Comment : pushout in the category $Pr^L$ are computed as pullback in Pr^R, which themselve are computed as pullback in Set. The "generaization" of this fact about $Pr^L$ would be a question about pullback of right adjoint functors instead. $\endgroup$
    – Simon Henry
    Commented May 28 at 16:56
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ It is much harder than I thought it would be to come up with a counterexample! $\endgroup$
    – Chris Schommer-Pries
    Commented May 29 at 15:00

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
3
$\begingroup$

No. Here is a counterexample. Let $n$ denote the linear order with $n$ elements. The pushout of the left adjoints $1 \leftarrow 2 \to 3$ is the walking retract $R$ where the second map is the inclusion of the endpoints. The functor $3\to R$ is not a left adjoint.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
2
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Note that $1,2,3$ are in $PrL$. $R$ is not (it doesn’t have binary products, although it does have a terminal object and equalizers I believe). $\endgroup$
    – Tim Campion
    Commented Jun 4 at 19:44
  • $\begingroup$ Interesting! I wonder what happens if we assume that the pushout is in PrL; then do the morphisms have adjoints? $\endgroup$
    – user39598
    Commented Jun 6 at 10:50

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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