Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with ct.category-theory
Search options not deleted
user 65954
Enriched categories, topoi, abelian categories, monoidal categories, homological algebra.
2
votes
A naive question about SGA4
In retrospect, it appears that claims 1 and 2 both lie on the fact that one normally insists, in a category C (specifically, in the category of sets), that a morphism should determine its domain and c …
- 327
3
votes
2
answers
623
views
A naive question about SGA4
Can someone explain to me the meaning of remark 1.1.2 at the begining of SGA4.1?
It says that if $C$ is a category that belongs to some universe $U$ (which I understand as "$\mathrm{Ob}(C)$ and $\mat …
- 327