It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

- All Categories 2.4K
- Chat 502
- Study Groups 21
- Petri Nets 9
- Epidemiology 4
- Leaf Modeling 2
- Review Sections 9
- MIT 2020: Programming with Categories 51
- MIT 2020: Lectures 20
- MIT 2020: Exercises 25
- Baez ACT 2019: Online Course 339
- Baez ACT 2019: Lectures 79
- Baez ACT 2019: Exercises 149
- Baez ACT 2019: Chat 50
- UCR ACT Seminar 4
- General 75
- Azimuth Code Project 110
- Statistical methods 4
- Drafts 10
- Math Syntax Demos 15
- Wiki - Latest Changes 3
- Strategy 113
- Azimuth Project 1.1K
- - Spam 1
- News and Information 148
- Azimuth Blog 149
- - Conventions and Policies 21
- - Questions 43
- Azimuth Wiki 718

Options

\(\def\cat#1{{\mathcal{#1}}}\) \(\def\Cat#1{{\textbf{#1}}}\) \(\newcommand{\smset}{\Cat{Set}}\) \(\def\Ob{{\mathrm{Ob}}}\) \(\newcommand{\cp}{.} \) \(\def\id{{\mathrm{id}}}\)

Recall from Example 4.47 that \(\cat{V}=(\smset,{1},\times)\) is a
symmetric monoidal category. This means we can apply
Definition \ref{def1}. Does the (rough) definition roughly agree with
the definition of category given in Definition 3.6? Or is there a subtle
difference?
\(\label{def1}\tag{4.49}\)
**Rough Definition 4.49**:

Let \(\cat{V}\) be a symmetric monoidal category, as in Definition 4.43. To
specify a *category enriched in \(\cat{V}\)*, or a *\(\cat{V}\)-category*,
denoted \(\cat{X}\),

- one specifies a collection \(\Ob(\cat{X})\), elements of which are called
*objects*; - for every pair \(x,y\in\Ob(\cat{X})\), one specifies an object \(\cat{X}(x,y)\in\cat{V}\), called the
*hom-object*for \(x,y\); - for every \(x\in\Ob(\cat{X})\), one specifies a morphism \(\id_x\colon I\to\cat{X}(x,x)\) in \(\cat{V}\), called the
*identity element*; - for each \(x,y,z\in\Ob(\cat{X})\), one specifies a morphism \(\cp\colon\cat{X}(x,y)\otimes\cat{X}(y,z)\to\cat{X}(x,z)\), called the
*composition morphism*.

These constituents are required to satisfy the usual associative and unital laws.

## Comments

Requirement 1. here corresponds to requirement 1. in the definition of a category. The hom-object becomes the set of morphisms. \(\mathrm{id}_x\) picks out a distinguished element of the set of morphisms from an object to itself, which by the definition of a monoidal category satisfies the left and right unit laws. So, this morphism is the identity morphism at \(x\). The composition morphism maps \(f\in\mathcal{X}(x,y)\), \(g\in\mathcal{X}(y,z)\) to \(\circ(f,g)\in\mathcal{X}(x,z)\). Because of the symmetric monoidal structure on

Set, iterated composites of morphisms are associative, so \(\circ(f,g)\) can reasonably be called \(g\circ f\). Note, however, that the laws that the morphisms must obey are only required to hold as isomorphisms, not equalities. So, in general, this does not yield the earlier definition of a category (but it's pretty close).`Requirement 1. here corresponds to requirement 1. in the definition of a category. The hom-object becomes the set of morphisms. \\(\mathrm{id}_x\\) picks out a distinguished element of the set of morphisms from an object to itself, which by the definition of a monoidal category satisfies the left and right unit laws. So, this morphism is the identity morphism at \\(x\\). The composition morphism maps \\(f\in\mathcal{X}(x,y)\\), \\(g\in\mathcal{X}(y,z)\\) to \\(\circ(f,g)\in\mathcal{X}(x,z)\\). Because of the symmetric monoidal structure on **Set**, iterated composites of morphisms are associative, so \\(\circ(f,g)\\) can reasonably be called \\(g\circ f\\). Note, however, that the laws that the morphisms must obey are only required to hold as isomorphisms, not equalities. So, in general, this does not yield the earlier definition of a category (but it's pretty close).`