0
$\begingroup$

This is Exercise I.7 of Mac Lane and Moerdijk's, "Sheaves in Geometry and Logic [. . .]".

Here $\mathbf{B}G$ is the category of all continuous $G$-sets, where $G$ is a topological group.

The Question:

Show that the forgetful functor $U:\mathbf{B}G\to\mathbf{Sets}$ need not preserve infinite limits.

Thoughts:

I have considered the contrapositive: that if some $U':\mathbf{B}G\to\mathbf{Sets}$ preserves infinite limits, then it is not a forgetful functor. I don't think this is the best way to go about it.


Next, similarly, I thought that I could attempt a proof by contradiction, by assuming $U$ always preserves infinite limits, but this time working with the forgetful functor and aiming for a contradiction in $\mathbf{Sets}$.

To this end, I have some category $\mathbf{I}$ to function as the infinite diagram category that acts on both $\mathbf{B}G$ and $\mathbf{Sets}$. So consider

$$\begin{align} U_\mathbf{I}: (\mathbf{B}G)^\mathbf{I} & \longrightarrow\mathbf{Sets}^\mathbf{I}\\ ((X, \sigma)\stackrel{f}{\to}(Y, \tau))^\mathbf{I} & \stackrel{?}{\mapsto} (X\stackrel{f}{\to} Y)^\mathbf{I}. \end{align}$$

Does the map $U_\mathbf{I}$ have to satisfy some universal property or something with respect to $\mathbf{I}$? I'm quite lost here.

I'm not sure how to work with $((X, \sigma)\stackrel{f}{\to}(Y, \tau))^\mathbf{I}$ and $(X\stackrel{f}{\to} Y)^\mathbf{I}$ either, whatever they are.


I think what I have so far might even be nonsense.


Please help :)

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Do you know how to compute any limit explicitly in $\mathbb{B}G$? Have you tried to compute a product of $2$ continuous $G$-sets? $\endgroup$ – Thibaut Benjamin Feb 14 '20 at 15:07
  • $\begingroup$ No and yes, respectively, @ThibautBenjamin. I have a rough idea how to do the former though. $\endgroup$ – Shaun Feb 14 '20 at 15:11
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Ok, sorry for the obvious question, but you haven't mentionned this in your potential approaches. I would try to compute the product of 2 continuous $G$-sets in the hope that it is not supported by the product of the $2$ underlying sets $\endgroup$ – Thibaut Benjamin Feb 14 '20 at 15:21
  • $\begingroup$ @ThibautBenjamin it seems clear from the problem statement that an infinite product will be needed. $\endgroup$ – Kevin Arlin Feb 14 '20 at 16:22
  • $\begingroup$ @KevinCarlson Indeed, I read "finite limits" instead of "infinite limits" $\endgroup$ – Thibaut Benjamin Feb 14 '20 at 16:26
2
$\begingroup$

Try to show that $G$ generally does not act continuously and consistent with the actions on $A_i$ on an infinite product in $\mathbf{Set}$ of continuous $G$-sets $A_i$. Hint: under the action induced from the $A_i$, what is the stabilizer of $(a_i)_{i\in I}$? What kind of intersections of open subgroups remain open?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Does this means then that the forgetful functor is not right adjoint to a "free continous G-set" functor ? $\endgroup$ – jeanmfischer Feb 14 '20 at 17:04
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @jeanmfischer That's right. In fact continuous $G$-sets are coreflective in the category of sets with an action of the discrete group $G^\delta$ on the underlying set of $G$. Thus there exists a co-free continuous $G$-set on a set, by composing with the right adjoint to the forgetful functor $G^\delta\to\mathbf{Set}$, but not in general a free one. $\endgroup$ – Kevin Arlin Feb 14 '20 at 17:06

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.