Few days ago, I was thinking about why we need to define V(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); ^{*}=Hom(V,K) for a K-vector space when the dimension of V is finite because then V^{*}and V both will have the same dimension and will be isomorphic. So, I couldn't understand why such a thing would be even called a dual vector space if it's the same thing algebraically when the dimension is finite. Then I read that these two vector spaces are isomorphic but there's no natural isomorphism between them.

I'm familiar with some terminology in category theory. I know the definition of a natural transformation in category theory. But I don't understand why natural definitions are important. I remember somewhere I read that Mac Lane has said that he didn't invent category theory to study functors, he invented it to study natural transformations.

Can someone explain to me in layman terms why natural transformations are interesting and how I should think of them?

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Why do we need natural transformations?

Loading...

Similar Threads - need natural transformations | Date |
---|---|

I Need clarification on a theorem about field extensions/isomorphisms | Dec 19, 2017 |

I Does this theorem need that Ker{F}=0? | May 1, 2017 |

I Nature of cyclic groups | Feb 21, 2017 |

Row and null complements of x; need clarity... | Oct 15, 2015 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**