Term for this concept in category theory?
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Suppose we have three objects $X,Y,Z$, and a morphism $m:Xto Y$.
Moreover, this morphism has the following property:
For any morphism $f:Zto Y$, there exists a morphism $f_X:Zto X$, such that $mcirc f_X=f$.
Intuitively, this seems to me to capture the notion that “any information we need to pick an element of $X$, there is enough information in Y to do so”
Essentially, it seems to me that this generalizes the idea of a surjective function, but this concept is already generalized by “epimorphism”, whose definition is different.
Is my definition equivalent to that of epimorphism? If not, is there a term for my definition?
category-theory
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Suppose we have three objects $X,Y,Z$, and a morphism $m:Xto Y$.
Moreover, this morphism has the following property:
For any morphism $f:Zto Y$, there exists a morphism $f_X:Zto X$, such that $mcirc f_X=f$.
Intuitively, this seems to me to capture the notion that “any information we need to pick an element of $X$, there is enough information in Y to do so”
Essentially, it seems to me that this generalizes the idea of a surjective function, but this concept is already generalized by “epimorphism”, whose definition is different.
Is my definition equivalent to that of epimorphism? If not, is there a term for my definition?
category-theory
If $Z$ can be any object, then what you describe is just a split epimorphism; see this question
– Arnaud D.
Nov 21 at 13:18
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Suppose we have three objects $X,Y,Z$, and a morphism $m:Xto Y$.
Moreover, this morphism has the following property:
For any morphism $f:Zto Y$, there exists a morphism $f_X:Zto X$, such that $mcirc f_X=f$.
Intuitively, this seems to me to capture the notion that “any information we need to pick an element of $X$, there is enough information in Y to do so”
Essentially, it seems to me that this generalizes the idea of a surjective function, but this concept is already generalized by “epimorphism”, whose definition is different.
Is my definition equivalent to that of epimorphism? If not, is there a term for my definition?
category-theory
Suppose we have three objects $X,Y,Z$, and a morphism $m:Xto Y$.
Moreover, this morphism has the following property:
For any morphism $f:Zto Y$, there exists a morphism $f_X:Zto X$, such that $mcirc f_X=f$.
Intuitively, this seems to me to capture the notion that “any information we need to pick an element of $X$, there is enough information in Y to do so”
Essentially, it seems to me that this generalizes the idea of a surjective function, but this concept is already generalized by “epimorphism”, whose definition is different.
Is my definition equivalent to that of epimorphism? If not, is there a term for my definition?
category-theory
category-theory
asked Nov 21 at 12:31
user56834
3,14321149
3,14321149
If $Z$ can be any object, then what you describe is just a split epimorphism; see this question
– Arnaud D.
Nov 21 at 13:18
add a comment |
If $Z$ can be any object, then what you describe is just a split epimorphism; see this question
– Arnaud D.
Nov 21 at 13:18
If $Z$ can be any object, then what you describe is just a split epimorphism; see this question
– Arnaud D.
Nov 21 at 13:18
If $Z$ can be any object, then what you describe is just a split epimorphism; see this question
– Arnaud D.
Nov 21 at 13:18
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
Take $f=id_Y$ : this gives $i$ such that $mcirc i = id_Y$. Thus $m$ is not only an epimorphism, it is a split epimorphism.
Conversely, given $m:Xto Y$ a split epimorphism, i.e. an epimorphism with a section $i:Yto X$ such that $mcirc i =id_Y$, let $f:Zto Y$, and consider $f_X :=icirc f : Zto X$. Then $mcirc f_X = mcirc i circ f= id_Ycirc f = f$
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
The natural way to name this property is "the object $Z$ has the left lifting property with respect to the morphism $m$". Indeed, if the category has an initial object, then the property you mentioned is equivalent to the left lifting property between $i_Z$ and $m$, where $i_Z$ is the unique morphism from the initial object to $Z$. If, in addition, the lifting morphism $f_X$ is unique for every $f$, then this property is called "the object $Z$ is orthogonal to $m$" (denoted by $Zperp m$, see definition 5.4.2 in F.Borceux, "Handbook of Categorical Algebra 1").
Wouldn't that only apply if there was a unique $f_X$?
– Arnaud D.
Nov 21 at 14:07
@ArnaudD. You are right, I overlooked it in Borceux, thank you. Considering it, I edited the answer.
– Oskar
Nov 21 at 14:43
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
Take $f=id_Y$ : this gives $i$ such that $mcirc i = id_Y$. Thus $m$ is not only an epimorphism, it is a split epimorphism.
Conversely, given $m:Xto Y$ a split epimorphism, i.e. an epimorphism with a section $i:Yto X$ such that $mcirc i =id_Y$, let $f:Zto Y$, and consider $f_X :=icirc f : Zto X$. Then $mcirc f_X = mcirc i circ f= id_Ycirc f = f$
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
Take $f=id_Y$ : this gives $i$ such that $mcirc i = id_Y$. Thus $m$ is not only an epimorphism, it is a split epimorphism.
Conversely, given $m:Xto Y$ a split epimorphism, i.e. an epimorphism with a section $i:Yto X$ such that $mcirc i =id_Y$, let $f:Zto Y$, and consider $f_X :=icirc f : Zto X$. Then $mcirc f_X = mcirc i circ f= id_Ycirc f = f$
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
up vote
3
down vote
Take $f=id_Y$ : this gives $i$ such that $mcirc i = id_Y$. Thus $m$ is not only an epimorphism, it is a split epimorphism.
Conversely, given $m:Xto Y$ a split epimorphism, i.e. an epimorphism with a section $i:Yto X$ such that $mcirc i =id_Y$, let $f:Zto Y$, and consider $f_X :=icirc f : Zto X$. Then $mcirc f_X = mcirc i circ f= id_Ycirc f = f$
Take $f=id_Y$ : this gives $i$ such that $mcirc i = id_Y$. Thus $m$ is not only an epimorphism, it is a split epimorphism.
Conversely, given $m:Xto Y$ a split epimorphism, i.e. an epimorphism with a section $i:Yto X$ such that $mcirc i =id_Y$, let $f:Zto Y$, and consider $f_X :=icirc f : Zto X$. Then $mcirc f_X = mcirc i circ f= id_Ycirc f = f$
answered Nov 21 at 13:18
Max
12.5k11040
12.5k11040
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
The natural way to name this property is "the object $Z$ has the left lifting property with respect to the morphism $m$". Indeed, if the category has an initial object, then the property you mentioned is equivalent to the left lifting property between $i_Z$ and $m$, where $i_Z$ is the unique morphism from the initial object to $Z$. If, in addition, the lifting morphism $f_X$ is unique for every $f$, then this property is called "the object $Z$ is orthogonal to $m$" (denoted by $Zperp m$, see definition 5.4.2 in F.Borceux, "Handbook of Categorical Algebra 1").
Wouldn't that only apply if there was a unique $f_X$?
– Arnaud D.
Nov 21 at 14:07
@ArnaudD. You are right, I overlooked it in Borceux, thank you. Considering it, I edited the answer.
– Oskar
Nov 21 at 14:43
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
The natural way to name this property is "the object $Z$ has the left lifting property with respect to the morphism $m$". Indeed, if the category has an initial object, then the property you mentioned is equivalent to the left lifting property between $i_Z$ and $m$, where $i_Z$ is the unique morphism from the initial object to $Z$. If, in addition, the lifting morphism $f_X$ is unique for every $f$, then this property is called "the object $Z$ is orthogonal to $m$" (denoted by $Zperp m$, see definition 5.4.2 in F.Borceux, "Handbook of Categorical Algebra 1").
Wouldn't that only apply if there was a unique $f_X$?
– Arnaud D.
Nov 21 at 14:07
@ArnaudD. You are right, I overlooked it in Borceux, thank you. Considering it, I edited the answer.
– Oskar
Nov 21 at 14:43
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
The natural way to name this property is "the object $Z$ has the left lifting property with respect to the morphism $m$". Indeed, if the category has an initial object, then the property you mentioned is equivalent to the left lifting property between $i_Z$ and $m$, where $i_Z$ is the unique morphism from the initial object to $Z$. If, in addition, the lifting morphism $f_X$ is unique for every $f$, then this property is called "the object $Z$ is orthogonal to $m$" (denoted by $Zperp m$, see definition 5.4.2 in F.Borceux, "Handbook of Categorical Algebra 1").
The natural way to name this property is "the object $Z$ has the left lifting property with respect to the morphism $m$". Indeed, if the category has an initial object, then the property you mentioned is equivalent to the left lifting property between $i_Z$ and $m$, where $i_Z$ is the unique morphism from the initial object to $Z$. If, in addition, the lifting morphism $f_X$ is unique for every $f$, then this property is called "the object $Z$ is orthogonal to $m$" (denoted by $Zperp m$, see definition 5.4.2 in F.Borceux, "Handbook of Categorical Algebra 1").
edited Nov 21 at 14:36
answered Nov 21 at 13:59
Oskar
2,6961718
2,6961718
Wouldn't that only apply if there was a unique $f_X$?
– Arnaud D.
Nov 21 at 14:07
@ArnaudD. You are right, I overlooked it in Borceux, thank you. Considering it, I edited the answer.
– Oskar
Nov 21 at 14:43
add a comment |
Wouldn't that only apply if there was a unique $f_X$?
– Arnaud D.
Nov 21 at 14:07
@ArnaudD. You are right, I overlooked it in Borceux, thank you. Considering it, I edited the answer.
– Oskar
Nov 21 at 14:43
Wouldn't that only apply if there was a unique $f_X$?
– Arnaud D.
Nov 21 at 14:07
Wouldn't that only apply if there was a unique $f_X$?
– Arnaud D.
Nov 21 at 14:07
@ArnaudD. You are right, I overlooked it in Borceux, thank you. Considering it, I edited the answer.
– Oskar
Nov 21 at 14:43
@ArnaudD. You are right, I overlooked it in Borceux, thank you. Considering it, I edited the answer.
– Oskar
Nov 21 at 14:43
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3007667%2fterm-for-this-concept-in-category-theory%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
If $Z$ can be any object, then what you describe is just a split epimorphism; see this question
– Arnaud D.
Nov 21 at 13:18