0
$\begingroup$

On page 28 of "Categories and Sheaves" it says:

$$ \eta : L R \to \text{id}_{C'} $$

is a functor but then they have in a commutative diagram right below that:

$$ \text{Hom}_{C'}(Y, Y') \xrightarrow{\eta_Y} \text{Hom}_{C'}(LR(Y), Y') $$

How does that make sense?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ do you mean it is a natural transformation between functors? because what you have written there looks an awful lot like a counit! $\endgroup$ – Enkidu Oct 30 '18 at 8:21
2
$\begingroup$

You have the morphism $\eta^Y : LR(Y) \to Y$ and you apply the contravariant functor $\mathrm{Hom}_{C'}(-,Y')$. This yields the desired morphism $$ \text{Hom}_{C'}(Y, Y') \xrightarrow{\eta_Y} \text{Hom}_{C'}(LR(Y), Y'). $$

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Shouldn't we put a $*$ next to $\eta_Y$: $\eta_Y^*$ since taking the domain-changing hom functor results in composition with $\eta_Y$ on the right? $\endgroup$ – BananaCats Category Theory App Nov 1 '18 at 0:04
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @RollupandsmokeAdjoint : I don't know the notations from your book, but I agree with you, we may write $\eta_Y := (\eta^Y)^*$, or write $\eta_Y :LR(Y) \to Y$ and $\eta_Y^* : \text{Hom}_{C'}(Y, Y') \to \text{Hom}_{C'}(LR(Y), Y')$. $\endgroup$ – Watson Nov 1 '18 at 8:31

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.