Johns Hopkins Category Theory Seminar
pretalk 4pm, talk 5:30pm
Fall 2017 Schedule: coming soon!
- September 7:
- September 28:
- October 12:
- October 19:
- October 26:
- November 2:
- November 16:
- December 7:
Fall 2016 Schedule (Occasional Mondays; pretalk 3pm, talk 4:30pm; Maryland 114):
Title: Factorisation systems in category theory
An (orthogonal) factorisation system on a category C consists of two classes (E,M) of morphisms in C, subject to an "orthogonality" axiom and both closed under composition and containing the isomorphisms, such that every morphism f in C factorises as f = me, with e in E and m in M. The axioms imply that the (E,M)-factorisations of a given morphism are unique up to unique isomorphism. As in the example of the image factorisation system (surjective, injective) on the category of sets, one can generally see a factorisation system on a category as providing a notion of image to its morphisms.
Following an introduction to the basic properties and examples of factorisation systems, this talk will survey the role of factorisation systems in such diverse topics of category theory as reflective subcategories, notions of epimorphism, regular categories and (bi)categories of relations, and constructions of associated sheaves, as dictated by time and interest.
Title: Simplicial objects
Simplicial objects provide a combinatorial model for doing homotopy theory, that generalize topological spaces and chain complexes simultaneously. In this talk we'll try and understand a multitude of examples of simplicial objects. We'll describe the homotopy groups of Kan complexes (fibrant objects in Quillen's model category). We'll state the connection between simplicial categories and other categories via dold-kan and geometric realization functors.
Title: An introduction to the Galois theory of Grothendieck
In SGA1, Grothendieck re-imagines Galois theory in terms of an axiomatic
characterisation of categories of group actions. This approach leads to
generalisations of Galois theory which applies to infinite field extensions and
to categories of commutative algebras. Maybe more surprisingly he is able to
demonstrate that, in this framework, Galois theory and the theory of covering
spaces / the fundamental group become examples of the same categorical
formalism. Ultimately, Grothendieck's insight gains it most abstract and all
encompassing form in the work of Joyal and Tierney, in which they demonstrate
that any Grothendieck topos, that is to say any category of of generalised sheaves, is equivalent to a category of continuous actions of some localic (spatial) groupoid.
We might call this the Galois groupoid of the topos.
In this talk I intend to provide an elementary introduction to Grothendieck's
Galois theory, proving as many of his core results as I can in the time
available. We will examine both finite and pro-finite variants, which will
enable us to discuss the Galois theory of (infinite) algebraic closures and the
theory of covering spaces of spaces that lack a universal covering space.
I also hope to briefly touch upon the primary themes and motivations that arise
in Joyal and Tierney's work. My plan is to rely on few categorical preliminaries, and to explain those that I
do need as we go along.
Title: A monad is just ... (with an eye to universal algebra)
- December 12: Tslil Clingman, Johns Hopkins
In this talk we aim to explore some of the elementary results in the
theory of monads. We will begin by examining how monads might naturally
arise from notions in monoidal categories and attempt to understand
monads and their modules (specifically algebras) in this light —
finding, as we will, the generation of monads from monoids to be
unsatisfactory in that the inverse problem does not admit an immediately
natural and adequate resolution. With that source of monads exhausted we
will turn to the next and perhaps most fruitful approach, viz., the
generation of monads from adjunctions.
Once some basic results have been established we will address the
inverse problem again and find here the famous results of Kleisli and
Eilenberg-Moore: every monad arises from an adjunction in two canonical
and somehow universal ways. We will explore the Kleisli category and
Eielenberg-Moore categories for some common monads in order to impress
the niceties of the latter, the category of algebras. In particular we
will interest ourselves with the observation that the construction of
Eilenberg-Moore inherits all limits and suitable colimits from the base
category and so prompt the answering of a very practical question: how
might we tell, for a given “algebraic” system (groups, monoids,
categories ...), whether and indeed which limits and colimits exist?
This will lead us to the notion of monadicity and the theorem of Beck.
Time permitting we will consider the idea of a distributive law so that
we may more clearly describe the situation of one monad acting over
another — the generalisation of the case of unital rings in which the
multiplicative monoid and additive group interact suitably.
Only a knowledge of categories, functors, natural transformations,
limits and adjoints will be assumed.
Contact Emily Riehl.