0
$\begingroup$

This is Corollary 1.3.10, p12. Note we are fixing a small Eilenberg Zilber category. The terminology are all given in the text. Tell me if the link is not accessible.

1.3.10: If a class of prehseaves over $A$ is saturated by monomorphisms and contains all representable presheaves, then it contains all presheaves over $A$.

The proof is by simple induction. But I do not understand two parts of the proof:

  1. Why is $Sk_0(Y)$ a sum of representable presheaf (which I assume means presheaves of the form $h_a$ from Yonnea embedding $A \rightarrow \hat{A}$).
  2. The axioms only guarantee that $\bigsqcup h_a \in \mathcal{C}$ but not $\bigsqcup \partial h_a \in \mathcal{C}$.
$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$
  1. I would explain this via the fact that $sk_nF$ is constructed by restricting $F$ to the full subcategory of $A$ on the objects of length at most $n$, then left Kan extending (applying the left adjoint of restriction) to get back to $A$. Then the claim follows from the fact that the full subcategory of length-$0$ objects is discrete, since every presheaf on a discrete category is a coproduct of representables. If you don't like this argument, the point is that $sk_0F$ has as sections the non-degenerate sections of $F$ over length $0$ objects together with their degeneracies.

  2. $\partial h_a$ is its own $n-1$-skeleton, so the inductive hypothesis covers it.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry, I am still unclear of 1. It would really help if you spell out details. I don't understand how every presheaf over a discrete category is a coproduct of representables. I also dont' know what left Kan extending means. Are there any introductory references for these? $\endgroup$ – CL. Sep 5 '18 at 9:42

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.