Given a category $\mathcal{C}$ is there necessarily another category $\mathcal{D}$ such that $\mathcal{C}$ is equivalent to the functor category $\mathrm{Set}^\mathcal{D}$? If so, is there a natural choice? Is there some hypothesis we could assume for $\mathcal{C}$ to make this question more interesting?
2026-03-26 16:09:47.1774541387
Can every category be regarded as the functor category of another?
80 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in CATEGORY-THEORY
- (From Awodey)$\sf C \cong D$ be equivalent categories then $\sf C$ has binary products if and only if $\sf D$ does.
- Continuous functor for a Grothendieck topology
- Showing that initial object is also terminal in preadditive category
- Is $ X \to \mathrm{CH}^i (X) $ covariant or contravariant?
- What concept does a natural transformation between two functors between two monoids viewed as categories correspond to?
- Please explain Mac Lane notation on page 48
- How do you prove that category of representations of $G_m$ is equivalent to the category of finite dimensional graded vector spaces?
- Terminal object for Prin(X,G) (principal $G$-bundles)
- Show that a functor which preserves colimits has a right adjoint
- Show that a certain functor preserves colimits and finite limits by verifying it on the stalks of sheaves
Related Questions in YONEDA-LEMMA
- How do I apply the Yoneda lemma to this functor?
- Do proofs using the Yoneda lemma work for Categories that are not locally small?
- bivariate Yoneda lemma
- Lattice subobjects of the power object in a topos
- When can functors fail to be adjoints if their hom sets are bijective?
- Additive Yoneda Lemma
- The famous Yoneda lemma
- Detecting family of $[\mathcal{C},\mathbf{Set}]$
- Alternative Description Of The Isomorphism $[C_0,[C_1,\text{Set}]]\cong[C_1,[C_0,\text{Set}]]$
- Representability criterion for Zariski sheaf in terms of open subfunctors
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
There are a lot of immediate obstacles to such an equivalence. In increasing order of fanciness: such a category can't have a zero object; the initial object must be strict; it must be complete and cocomplete; as the commenters say it must be Cartesian closed and admit a subobject classifier. These conditions already rule out the great majority of natural examples.
If $\mathcal D$ is to be small, such categories may be fully characterized as the cocomplete categories containing a small dense subcategory consisting of small-projective objects, which are the objects $x$ such that for any diagram $D:I\to \mathcal C$, one has $$\mathcal C(x,\mathrm{colim}_I D(i))\cong \mathrm{colim}_I \mathcal C(x,D(i))$$ with the colimit on the right-hand side taken in sets. If $\mathcal D$ is not to be small, such categories are not very natural. Better to take either small functors from $\mathcal D$, in which case essentially the same characterization applies, or functors from $\mathcal D$ into large sets; ditto modulo moving up a Grothendieck universe.
To be small-projective is a vast strengthening of the notion of projectivity familiar from homological algebra, and it's overwhelmingly rare in practice. Such perfectly innocent categories as the categories of sheaves on any nontrivial space and any abelian category have almost no small-projective objects. (For concrete abelian categories, the problem is that not every element of a biproduct comes from one of the factors.) Small-projectives also do not arise in complete posets without extreme assumptions, something like being a finite total order.
In short, very few categories can be realized in this form except those you already know can be: sets and categories of actions of a group, a monoid, or a category on sets.
However, most natural categories do embed fully faithful in such a category. Barr's embedding theorem gives such a result for regular categories, while the ever-popular locally presentable categories are in fact reflectively embedded in such a category, via embeddings preserving certain colimits; on the other side of things Grothendieck toposes are reflectively embedded by an embedding with a reflector preserving certain limits.