Functor Categories
Let’s consider two categories enriched over a monoidal category —
and
— and assume that
is equivalent to a small category. We’ll build a
-category
of functors between them.
Of course the objects will be functors . Now for functors
and
we need a
-object of natural transformations between them. For this, we will use an end:
This end is sure to exist because of the smallness assumption on . Its counit will be written
.
An “element” of this object is an arrow
. Such arrows correspond uniquely to
-natural families of arrows
, which we know is the same as a
-natural transformation from
to
. We also see that at this level of elements, the counit
takes a
-natural transformation and “evaluates” it at the object
.
Now we need to define composition morphisms for these hom-objects. This composition will be inherited from the target category . Basically, the idea is that at each object a natural transformation gives a component morphism in the target category, and we compose transformations by composing their components. Of course, we have to finesse this a bit because we don’t have sets and elements anymore.
So how do we get a component morphism? We use the counit map ! We have the arrow
which we can then hit with the composition . This is a
-natural family indexed by
, so by the universal property of the end we have a unique arrow
Similarly we get the arrow picking out identity morphism on as the unique one satisfying
So is a
-category whose underlying ordinary category is that of
-functors and
-natural transformations between the
-categories
and
. That is, it’s the hom-category
in the 2-category of
-categories.