A question on my Category Theory examples sheet is essentially as follows:

We define a degenerate monad $\mathbb{T} = (T, \eta, \mu)$ on $\mathbf{Set}$ to be one which has a non-monic unit; equivalently, there is no $\mathbb{T}$-algebra with more than one element. How many degenerate monads are there on $\mathbf{Set}$?

I've shown that every pair $( \{ a \}, \alpha: T \{ a \} \to \{ a \})$ is already an algebra, whatever the monad is (because $\{ a \}$ is terminal, so the "I am an algebra" commuting diagrams automatically commute).

Therefore, there are only two possible Eilenberg-Moore categories we could have made: "every one-element set", and "every one-element set, and also the empty set". That latter occurs iff $T \emptyset = \emptyset$.

There is the theorem which states that "for any $\mathbf{Set}$-monad $\mathbb{T}$, the forgetful functor $\mathbf{Set}^{\mathbb{T}} \to \mathbf{Set}$ has a left adjoint, and the adjunction induces $\mathbb{T}$"; from this I deduce that if we know the category of algebras, we have already determined $\mathbb{T}$ up to isomorphism.

Therefore, since we have only at most two options for the Eilenberg-Moore category, we must also only have at most two options for $\mathbb{T}$.

How can we determine whether these two options are indeed Eilenberg-Moore categories (and therefore whether we can induce monads from them)? All my theorems are about showing things about E-M categories, not about showing that something is an E-M category; the only constructive thing I can see is that the E-M category is initial over the category of adjunctions inducing $\mathbb{T}$, and I don't see how to apply that at all (and suspect it's not applicable).

I think that the one-point sets, together with the empty set, form the category of algebras over the monad $(T, \eta, \mu)$ where $T: A \to \{ a \}$, $\eta: \{ a \} \ni a \mapsto a \in A$, $\mu: \{ a \} \to \{ a \}$, and we've used super-industrial Choice to pick an element $a$ of every set $A$, and $T(\emptyset) = \emptyset$. However, this is something of a rabbit out of a hat.

  • $\begingroup$ Look up the monadicity / Barr-Beck theorem. $\endgroup$ – Qiaochu Yuan Nov 25 '15 at 22:19
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Just compute directly. You know what the monad must be, so why not show that you have a monad? $\endgroup$ – Zhen Lin Nov 25 '15 at 22:34

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.