Skip to main content
user6082's user avatar
user6082's user avatar
user6082's user avatar
user6082
  • Member for 14 years, 7 months
  • Last seen more than 3 years ago
awarded
accepted
answered
Loading…
revised
Kleisli Monad bijection
added 214 characters in body
Loading…
comment
Kleisli Monad bijection
Thanks for this. But I'm not talking about the Kleisli Category $C_T$, I am talking about the Kleisli triple over $C$ (sorry, this was my mistake; I'll edit the question). In every place where I have seen the Kleisli triple defined from a Monad, the underlying Category is the same with no indexing of objects. When you index the objects, surely it is a different category, however you present the theory.
comment
Kleisli Monad bijection
I thought that * has to be defined on the whole class of morphisms. Even if you restricted it to Hom(A,TB), the initial problem is still there because I might define it differently on Hom(A,TC) but TB=TC. Could you give a precise mathematical definition that makes sense (forget Isabelle for the moment)?
comment
Kleisli Monad bijection
I was thinking about this, but that's a different category, isn't it?
revised
Kleisli Monad bijection
added 99 characters in body
Loading…
awarded
revised
Kleisli Monad bijection
added 442 characters in body
Loading…
comment
Kleisli Monad bijection
Maybe I did not make myself clear enough. It is a subtle point (maybe trivial?), and one that I missed until I tried to formally write down a definition in Isabelle. Given a monad $(T,\mu,\eta)$, I need to define $*$ on the class $\{f|\exists A,B \in |\mathbf{C}| . f : A \to T B \}$. If $T$ were an embedding then I could just take $B := T^{-1}(\mathrm{cod}(f))$. What do I do though when $T$ is not an embedding? All I know about the codomain of an element of this class is that it is in the image of $T$. There may be many $B$'s and the $\mu_B$'s may be different!
asked
Loading…
awarded
awarded
awarded
Loading…