Category Theory. Course by Dr. Arthur Hughes, Typset by Cathal Ormond
|
|
- Audrey Haynes
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Category Theory Course by Dr. Arthur Hughes, 2010 Typset by Cathal Ormond
2 Contents 1 Types, Composition and Identities Programs Functional Laws Categories Deinitions Examples Functors Deinitions More Deinitions Examples o Functors Universal Properties Terminal Object Duality Initial Object Binary Product Examples o Binary Products Binary Sum Examples o Binary Sums More on Functors Covariant Hom Functor Covariant Hom Functor Subcategory Universal Morphism Natural Transormations Equivalence The Functor Category Yoneda Embeddings The Yoneda Lemma A Supplementary Deinitions 28 A.1 Function and Classes A.2 Structures
3 Chapter 1 Types, Composition and Identities 1.1 Programs A program (unction) applied to an argument x is denoted x or (x). We will develop some notation beore we continue: g x = (g x) <, g > x =< x, g x > { x i t = l [, g] < t, x >= g x i t = r We also deine the ollowing primitive unctions: id x = x outl (x, y) = x outr (x, y) = y inl x =< l, x > inr x =< r, x > zero x = 0 succ x = x + 1 The above notation is quite abstract, so we can think o them in amiliar terms by using set notation: I : A B, then x A x B. I : A B, g : B C, then g : A C. I : T A, g : T B, then <, g >: T A B. I : A T, g : B T, then [, g] : A + B T. We can also consider the above deined unctions in terms o set theory: id : A A
4 4 outl : A B A outr : A B B inl : A A + B inr : B A + B zero : 1 N succ : N N where 1 is the set containing one element, sometimes denoted { }. It is common to denoted such unctions by what are called commuting diagrams. For example, we denote the act that i : A B, g : B C then g : A C by the ollowing commuting diagram: 1.2 Functional Laws We have a set o laws that apply to all programs/unctions: Identity Law: I : A B, then id A = : A B Identity Law: I : A B, then id B = : A B Associativity Law: I : A B, g : B C, h : C D, then h (g ) = (h g) : A D I A : T A, g : T B then outl <, g >= : T A I A : T A, g : T B then outr <, g >= g : T B < outl A,B, outr A,B >= id A B : A B A B We can represent the above by commuting diagrams: A id A A B A B idb B A B h g g g C h D T A outl <,g> A B g outr B A outl A B id A B A B outr B outl outr where we have combined the 4 th and 5 th conditions in the second last diagram. We wish to sepa- We shall denote by (A B) the set o all unctions rom A to B. rate the ollowing two concepts: unctional programs and their laws the meaning o unctions as deined by their application. For example, given (x) = x 2 we wish to dierentiate between and x 2. We will usually consider simply and its properties. To do this, we use categories and unctions, instead o sets and mappings.
5 Chapter 2 Categories 2.1 Deinitions We deine a Category C to contain the ollowing data: 1. Obj(C), a class o objects. 2. Mor(C), a class called the morphisms o C. 3. dom, cod : Mor(C) Obj(C). For all Mor(C), we call dom() the deomain o and cod() the codomain o. 4. id : Obj(C) Mor(C). For all A Obj(C), id (A) = id A is called the identity morphism or A. 5. : Mor(C) Mor(C) Mor(C) a partial unction called composition. For, g Mor(C) we denote by g the composite o g ater subject to the ollowing conditions: dom(id A ) = A = cod(id A ) g Mor(C) cod() = dom(g) i g is deined, then dom(g ) = dom() and cod(g ) = cod(g) i dom() = A and cod() = B, then id B = = id A The associativity law holds on Mor(C) We denote by C[A, B] or C(A, B) the class o morphisms rom A to B. I or all A, B Obj(C), C[A, B] is a set, then these sets are called homomorphism (or simply hom) sets. We have the ollowind deinitions: A category C is called Small i Obj(C) is a set and or all A, B Obj(C), C[A, B] is a (hom) set. A category C is called Locally Small i or all A, B Obj(C), C[A, B] is a (hom) set. A category C is called Large i Obj(C) is not a set.
6 6 2.2 Examples The ollowing are large categories From Sets Set a category o sets, whose objects are sets and whose morphisms are mappings between sets. Pn a category o sets, whose objects are sets and whose morphisms are partial mappings between sets. Rel a category o sets and relations, whose objects are sets and whose morphisms are binary relations on the sets. Set a category o sets, whose objects are inite sets and whose morphisms are mappings. Set the category o pointed sets, whose objects are pairs o the orm (A, A ) where A is a set and A A and whose morphisms are mappings : A B such that ( A ) = B, called base point preserving. Set a category o sets, whose objects are sets which don t contain and whose morphisms are mappings : A { } B { } such that ( ) =, called - preserving Algrbraic Structures Graph the category o directed graphs, whose objects are directed graphs and whose morphisms are graph morphisms. Mon the category o monoids, whose objects are monoids and whose morphisms are monoid morphisms. Grp the category o groups, whose objects are groups and whose morphisms are group homomorphisms. Ab the category o Abelian Groups, whose objects are Abelian Groups and whose morphisms are group homomorphisms. Rng the category o rings, whose objects are rings and whose morphisms are ring homomorphisms. CRng the category o commutative rings, whose objects are commutative rings and whose morphisms are ring homomorphisms. Vect F the category o vector spaces, whose objects are vector spaces over the ield F and whose morphisms are linear transormations. Pre the category o preorders, whose objects are preorders and whose morphisms are monotone (order preserving) mappings. Pos the category o posets, whose objects are posets and whose morphisms are monotone mappings. M-Set the category o M actions, whose objects are actions on a ixed monoid M and whose morphisms are M-action morphisms.
7 Topological Spaces Top a category o topological spaces, whose objects are topological spaces and whose morphisms are continuous mappings. Top h a category o topological spaces, whose objects are topological spaces and whose morphisms are homotopy classes o continuous mappings. Top a category o topological spaces, whose objects are topological spaces with base points and whose morphisms are base point preserving continuous mappings. Isomorphism A morphism C[A, B] is called an Isomorphism i there exists some g C[A, B] such that g = id A and g = id B. We call g the inverse or sometimes denoted 1, and also say that A and B are isomorphic, denoted A = B Proposition I g 1, g 2 C[A, B] are inverses or C[A, B], then g 1 = g 2 Proo Proposition g 1 = g 1 id B = g 1 ( g 2 ) = (g 1 ) g 2 = id A g 2 = g 2 Identity morphisms are isomorphisms Proo This ollows directly rom the deinitions o isomorphism and identity Proposition The composition o two isomorphisms is an isomorphism. Proo Let and g be isomorphisms with inverses 1 and g 1 respectively. We ll show that (g ) 1 = 1 g 1. (g ) 1 = 1 g 1 (g ) 1 g 1 = id g ( 1 ) g 1 = id g id g 1 = id g g 1 = id the last statement o which is clearly true. The other direction, i.e. showing that ( g) 1 = g 1 1 ollows similarly. The ollowing are small categories. Given a preorder P = (P, ), the objects are elements o P and the morphisms are given by : x y exists i x y.
8 8 Given a set S, the objects are elements o S and the morphisms are simply the identity morphisms. Given a monoid M =< M,, u >, the objects are the single object and the morphisms are the mappings x : or all x M Given a graph G =< N, E, s, t >, the objects are the nodes in N and the morphisms are paths between nodes. 0 the empty category, graph with no objects and no morphisms, generated rom the empty graph. 1 the trivial category containing one object and the identity mapping, generated rom a graph with one node and no edges. 2 the category containing two points and three mappings (two identity mappings) generated rom the graph with two nodes and one edge. the category with one object and one mapping, generated rom a graph with one node and one edge. A unction Rwhich assigns to each pair A, B in a category C a binary relation R A,B on the hom class C[A, B] is called a congruence or relation on C i: or all A, B Obj(C), R A,B C[A, B]. is a relexive, symmetric and transitive relation on or all A, B, A, B Obj(C) and or all, C[A, B], g C[A, A ], h C[B, B ] we have R A,B (h g)r A,B (h g) Proposition Given any unction R which assigns to each pair A, B in a category C a binary relation R A,B on the hom class C[A, B], then there exists a least congruence R on C with R R. Quotient category Given a category C and a unction R which assings to each pair A, B in a category C a binary relation R A,B on the hom class C[A, B], then there exits a Quotient category C/R whose objects are objects o the category C and whose objects are the hom classes (C/R)[A, B] := C[A, B]/R A,B, where R A,B is the least congruence o C containing R. Dual Category Given a category C, we deine the Dual category, denoted C op, by Obj(C op ) = Obj(C) or all A, B Obj(C), C op [A, B] := C[B, A] dom op () = cod() and cod op () = dom() id op A = id A op g := g
9 9 Product Category Given categories C, D, we deine the Product category, denoted C D, by Obj(C D) = Obj(C) Obj(D) or all A, A Obj(C) and B, B Obj(D) we deine C D[< A, B >, < A, B >] := C[A, A ] C[B, B ] dom C D (<, g >) :=< dom C (), dom D (g) >, cod C D (<, g >) :=< cod C (), cod C (g) > id <A,B> :=< id A, id B > < g, g > <, >:=< g, g > Slice Category Given a category C and an element X Obj(C), then we deine the Slice category over X, denoted C/X, by Objects: pairs < A, > where A Obj(C) and C[A, X] Morphisms: mappings h :< A, > < A, > where h : A A is a morphism in C and = h
10 Chapter 3 Functors 3.1 Deinitions A (covariant) Functor F : C D between categories C and D consists o an object mapping F Obj : Obj(C) Obj(D) and a morphism mapping F : Mor(C) Mor(D) such that or all Mor(C), we have dom(f ()) = F Obj (dom()) and cod(f ()) = F Obj (cod()), or all A Obj(C), we have F (id A ) = id FObj (A) or all A, B, C Obj(C) and or all C[A, B], g C[B, C], we have F (g ) = F (g) F (). Usually, the subsript Obj is dropped when the meaning is clear. Equivalently, we have a (covariant) unctor F : C D consists o a unction F : Obj(C) Obj(D) and a amily o unctions F [A, B] : C[A, B] D[F (A), F (B)] induced by pairs < A, B > o objects o C such that or all A Obj(C), we have F [A, A](id A ) = id F (a) or all A, B, C Obj(C) and or all C[A, B], g C[B, C] we have F [A, C](g A,B,C ) = F [B, C](g) F (A),F (B),F (C) F [A, B]() 3.2 More Deinitions Given unctors F : C D and G : D E, we deine the Composite unctor G F : C E by the ollowing: A G(F (A)) B G(F ()) G(F (B))
11 11 Given a category C, the Identity unctor on C denoted id C : C C is given by A A B B We denote by Cat the category o small categories and unctors between small categories. We denote by CAT the category o categories and unctors between categories. A unctor F : C op D is called a Contravariant unctor. 3.3 Examples o Functors We have the inclusion unctor which, or example, maps Set to Pn or Pn to Rel. (x) i x A, x dom() : Pn Set with, where (x) = B i x A, x / dom() or B x = A mappings o the orm : A B. D :Set Pn with D, where dom(d) := {x A x A, (x) B } and (D)(x) = (x) or all x dom(d), where :< A, A > < B, B > U :Mon Set which is a orgetul unctor (it orgets the monoid structure and just gives a set). V :Cat Graph, a orgetul unctor given by: < Obj(C), Mor(C), dom C, cod C, id C, > < Obj(C), Mor(C), dom C, cod C > F V (F ) < Obj(D), Mor(D), dom D, cod D, id D, > < Obj(D), Mor(D), dom D, cod D > :Graph Cat, a ree unctor given by < N, E, s, t > < N, P (E), s, t, id, > h where we deine < N, E, s, t > < N, P (E ), s, t, id, > P (E) := {e 1,..., e n t(e i ) = s(e i+1 ), 1 i n} {id A A N}, where the identity element is interpreted as the empty word.
12 12 composition to be the concatenation or the paths which join head to tail. h : G H is a unctor between categories deined by: a N h n (a) N e 1 e 2 e n h (e 1 e 2 e n):=h e(e 1 ) h e(e n) b N h n (b) N I :AbMon Mon an inclusion unctor, which is the identity mapping on the objects o AbMon, and where AbMon[A, A ] Mon[A, A ] U :M-Set Set, a orgetul unctor. Given a monoid M =< M,, u >, we can also consider two unctors in the reverse order to the last example: Set M-Set, a ree unctor given by the ollowing commutative diagram A < M A, δ : M (M A) M A > :=id M B < M B, δ : M (M B) M B > where or all m, m M, a A, b B we deine δ (m, (m, a)) := (m m, a) and δ (m, (m, b)) := (m m, b) Set M-Set, a ree unctor given by the ollowing commutative diagram A < M A, δ : M (M A) M A > :=id M B < M B, δ : M (M B) M B > where or all m, m M, M A, g M B we deine [δ (m, )](m ) := (m m ) and [δ (m, g)](m ) := g(m m )
13 Chapter 4 Universal Properties 4.1 Terminal Object A terminal object in a category C is an object 1 such that or all A Obj(C) there exists a unique morphism rom A to 1, i.e. C[A, 1] contains one object. We ll denote this unique isomorphism by <> A Proposition I 1 and 1 are terminal objects o a category C, then there exists a unique isomorphism rom 1 to 1. Proo As 1 is terminal, there exists a unique <> 1 : 1 1. Similarly, as 1 is terminal, there exists a unique <> 1 : 1 1. Note that the only element in C[1, 1] is id 1 and the only element in C[1, 1 ] is id 1. However, <> 1 <> 1 : 1 1 and <> 1 <> 1 : 1 1, so <> 1 and <> 1 must be isomorphisms Proposition: Relection Law <> 1 = id 1 Proo <> 1 = id 1 i id 1 : 1 1, which is true Proposition: Fusion Law I C[A, B], then <> B =<> A Proo <> B =<> A i <> B : 1 1, which is true.
14 Duality Let S(C) be a statement about the objects and morphisms o a catagory C. Then we can orm, by reversing the direction o all the morphisms in S(C), another statement S op (C) = S(C op ) about C Proposition For all C Obj(CAT), S(C) is equivalent to or all Obj(CAT), S op (C). Proo For all C, we have S(C) S(C op ) S op (C). Similarly, or all C, we have S op (C) S op (C op ) S((C op ) op ) S(C). The question arises: what is the dual statement to the terminal object? 4.3 Initial Object An Initial Object in a category C is an object 0 such that or all A Obj(C) there exists a unique morphism rom 0 to A, i.e. C[0, A] contains one object. We ll denote this unique isomorphism by [ ] A. The irst ollowing three propositions now ollow by duality Proposition I 0 and 0 are terminal objects o a category C, then there exists a unique isomorphism rom 0 to Proposition: Relection Law [ ] 0 = id Proposition: Fusion Law I C[A, B], then [ ] A = [ ] B Proposition The empty category 0 is an initial object in Cat Proposition The trivial category 1 is a terminal object in Cat Proposition The empty set is an initial object in Set.
15 Proposition The singleton set { } is a terminal object in Set. 4.4 Binary Product A Binary Product o two objects A, B in a category C is speciied by an object A B o Obj(C) two projection morphisms outl: A B A and outr: A B B such that the ollowing diagram commutes T g!<,g> A A B outl outr B We say that a category has binary products i a binary product exists or all pairs o objects Proposition I < P, outl, outr > and < P, outl, outr > are binary product or the objects A, B o a category C, then there exists a unique isomorphism h : P P such that outl = outl h and outr = outr h. Proo As < P, outl, outr > is a binary product, we know that there exists some unique < outl, outr >: P P such that and outl = outl < outl, outr > outr = outr < outl, outr > Similarly, as < P, outl, outr > is a binary product, we know that there exists some unique < outl, outr >: P P such that outl = outl < outl, outr > and outr = outr < outl, outr >
16 16 We will show that the ollowing diagram commutes: P outl outr <outl,outr> A outl P outr B <outl,outr> outl outr P As per above, rom outl = outl < outl, outr > and outl = outl < outl, outr >, we conclude that outl < outl, outr > < outl, outr >= outl and so < outl, outr > < outl, outr >= id P Using similar logic, but in the other direction, we can show that < outl, outr > < outl, outr >= id P also. Thus, < outl, outr > and < outl, outr > must be isomorphisms Proposition: Relection Law < outl, outr >= id A B Proposition: Fusion Law <, g > h =< h, g h > 4.5 Examples o Binary Products Set Let A and B be sets. A B := {< a, b > a A, b B} outl < a, b >= a outr < a, b >= b Mon Let < M,, u > and < M,, u > be monoids. M M :=< M M,, < u, u >>, where < m, m > < n, n >=< m n, m n >. outl < m, n >= m outr < m, n >= n
17 Cat Let C and D be monoids. C D is the product category. outl(<, g >:< A, B > < C, D >) = ( : A C) outl(<, g >:< A, B > < C, D >) = (g : B D) Pos I C, P, > is a category deined by a poset, then a binary product exists i the poset has a greatest lower bound or all pairs o elements p, q P p q := {p, q} := p q outl : p q p i p q = p outl : p q q i p q = q Proposition I C is a category with a speciied binary product, then C C C given by (A, B) A B (,g) g=< outl,g outr > (A, B ) A B is a biunctor. Proo We need to show the ollowing or all, g Mor(C), dom( g) =dom() dom(g) and cod( g) =cod() cod(g) or all A, B Obj(C), id A id B = id A B or all A, A, A, B, B, B C and C[A, A ], C[A, A ], g C[B, B ], g C[B B ], we have ( ) (g g) = ( g ) ( g) The irst part ollows directly rom the deinitions. The second part is true by noting that id A id B =< id A outl, id B outr >=< outl, outr >= id A B the last part o which ollows by the relection law. To show the inal part, we note the ollowing proposition Proposition: The Absorbtion Law ( g) < p, q >=< p, g q >
18 18 Proo ( g) < p, q >=< outl, g outr > < p, q >=< outl p, g outr q >=< p, g q > Thus, our previous proposition ollows thus: ( g ) ( g) = ( g ) < outl, g outr >= ( outl, g g outr) = ( ) (g g) Proposition I C is a category with binary products and with a terminal object, then the ollowing natural isomorphisms exist or all A, B, C C: Proposition unit A : A 1 A swap A,B : A B B A assoc A,B,C : (A B) C A (B C) A binary product o objects A, B in a category C is a terminal object in the span[a, B](C) o spans over A and B: Objects: pairs o morphisms rom C with a common source, i.e. (, g) where A T g B. m : (, g) (, g ) where m : T T is a morphism on C such that m = and g m = g. 4.6 Binary Sum A Binary Sum o objects A, B in a category C is speciied by an object A + B o C with two injective morphisms inl : A A + B and inr : B A + B such that the ollowing diagram commutes: A inl A + B [,g] T inr g Note that this is the dualized idea o binary products. This gives us the ollowing propositions Proposition: Relection Law [inl, inr] = id A+B B
19 Proposition: Fusion Law h [, g] = [h, h g] 4.7 Examples o Binary Sums Set Let A and B be sets. A + B := A B := ({l} A) ({r} B) inl(a) = (l, a) inr(b) = (r, b) Mon Let M =< M,, u > and M =< M,, u > be monoids, and deine (A + B) to be the set o inite sequences o elements rom the set A + B M + M :=< (M + M ) /,, [ɛ] >, where is the concatenation operation i.e. [(x,..., y)] [(x,..., y )] = [(x,..., y, x,..., y )], [ɛ] is the empty word and is the least equivalence relation such that u ɛ and ɛ u (..., a, a,... ) (..., a a,... ) or all a, a M, (..., b, b,... ) (..., b b,... ) or all b, b B inl(a) = [(a)] inr(b) = [(b)] in the above, what we means by the least equivalence relation is the equivalence relation given by: l A < A,, ɛ > r [ ] A < A / A,, [ɛ] > = < A,, u > inl inl l < (A + B),, ɛ > [ ] < (A + B) / A,, [ɛ] > r inr inr B l r < B,, ɛ > [ ] B < B / B,, [ɛ] > = < B,, u >
20 20 Example: Graph I G is a directed graph, G is the underlying graph o the path category over G, H Obj(Cat) and H is the underlying graph o the category H, then we have the ollowing: G ηg G! H G! H I we are given : (A,, u) (M,, u ) and g : (B,, u ) (M,, u ), then we want to construct a unique h : ((A+B) /,, [ɛ]) (M,, u ) such that h = h inl and g = h inr. Step 1 In Set, we have inl inl A A + B B![,g] g M Step 2 In Set and then in Mon, we have (A + B) η A+B (A + B) [,g]! [,g] M ((A + B),, ɛ)! [,g] (M,, u ) Step 3 x u l ((A + r B), [], ɛ) ((A + B) /,, [ɛ])!h [,g] (M,, u )
21 Chapter 5 More on Functors 5.1 Deinition: Covariant Hom Functor Given a ixed object A o a catagory C the Covariant Hom Functor is a mapping C[A, +] = H A + : C Set such that B h C[A, B] g C[A,g]=H A g B C[A, B ] where C[A, g] = H A g is given by H A g (h) = g h. 5.2 Deinition: Covariant Hom Functor Given a ixed object B o a catagory C the Contravariant Hom Functor is a mapping C[, B] = H B : Cop Set such that A h C[A, B] F op C[F op,b]=h Fop B A C[A, B] where C[F op, B] = H Fop B is given by H B (h) = h F op. 5.3 Deinition: Subcategory C is called a Subcategory o D i there exists an inclusion unctor I : C D such that I( : A B) = ( : A B) Deinition: Faithul A unctor F : C D is called Faithul i the morphism mapping o the unctor is injective.
22 Deinition: Full A unctor F : C D is called Full i the morphism mapping o the unctor is surjective Deinition: Isomorphic Two categories C and D are said to be isomorphic, denoted C = D i there exist mappings F : C D and G : D C such that F G = id C and G F = id D. 5.4 Universal Morphism I G : X A is a unctor and A A is an object, then a universal morphism is a pair < A, η : A G(A ) > consisting o an object A X and a morphism η : A G(A ) o A such that to every pair < X, : A G(X) > with X X an object and a morphism o A, there exist a unique mapping [] : A X with G([]) η =, i.e. X G A A η A G(A )![]!G([]) X G(X) Example: U :Mon Set Let A be a set, deine η(a) =< a > and (a) = 1 or all a A, we have η A U(< A,, u >) < G,, ɛ > where L is the length mapping.!u(l) U(< N, +, 0 >) L < N, +, 0 > Example: U :Graph Cat Let G be a graph and H be a small category. Then, we have η G G U(G ) G U(H)!U([h]) L H
23 Example: U :Mon Set Let A be a set, deine η(a) =< a > and (a) = 1 or all a A, we have η A U(< A,, u >) < G,, ɛ > where L is the length mapping.!u(l) U(< N, +, 0 >) L < N, +, 0 > Example: Diagonal Functor Let : C C C be the unctor given by (A, A) = A, called the diagonal unctor. Then we have: (A, B) (inl,inr) (A + B)! ([,g]) (,g) (T ) A + B [,g] T 5.5 Natural Transormations Given categories C and D and two unctors F, G : C D, we deine a Natural Transormation denoted ψ : F G : C D as a collection φ = {φ A : F (A) G(A) A obj(c)} o morphisms o D indexed by objects o C such that or all (: A B) Mor(C), we have F (A) φ A G(A) C F D F () G() φ F (B) φ B G(B) C G D The morphism φ A is called the component o φ. A natural transormation φ : F G : C D is called an Isomorphism i φ A is an isomorphism or all A Obj(C). 5.6 Equivalence We say that two categories C and D are Equivalent i there exists two unctors F, G : C D together with two natural isomorphisms ɛ : F G = id D and η : id C = GF. 5.7 The Functor Category Let C and D be two categories. The Functor Category usually denoted [C, ] or D C is given by:
24 24 The objects are unctors rom C to D The morphisms are natural transormations between unctors We deine dom(α : F G : C D) = F : C D cod(α : F G : C D) = G : C D We deine the identity transormation on a unctor F as id F = {id F (A) : F (A) F (A) A Obj(C)} We deine the composition o two natural transormations α : F G and β : G H as the mapping β α : F H, where β α = {(β α) A = β A α A : F (A) H(A) A Obj(C)}
25 Chapter 6 Yoneda Embeddings Let C be a locally small category, and deine H : C op [C, Set ] as ollows: A C[A, +] = H A + op H op A C[A, +] = H A + where H op : H A + H A + : C Set is deined or all (g : B B ) Mor(C) as H A B H op B H A B H A g H A g H A B H H op B A B 6.1 The Yoneda Lemma Let C be a locally small category, F : C Set a unctor and A Obj(C). The collection nat[h A +, F ] o natural transormations α : H A + F is a set, so we may deine a unctor Nat[H, +] : C [C, Set ] Set given by < A, F > Nat[H A +, F ] <,µ> Nat[H,µ] < A, F > Nat[H+ A, F ]
26 26 where we deine Nat[H, µ] = (Nat[H, +]) <, µ >. We can also deine the eval unctor, namely ev : C [C, Set ] Set as < A, F > F (A) <,µ> ev<,µ> where or all x F (A), we have < A, F > F (A ) (ev <, µ >)(x) = [F () µ A ](x) = [µ A F ()](x) There exists natural ismorphisms Φ : Nat[H, +] ev : Ψ such that or all A Obj(C) and F : C Set, we have Proo Part A Φ <A,F > : Nat[H A, F ] = F (A) : Ψ <A,F > We ll show that or all A Obj(C), F : C Set, we have Nat[H A +, F ] Set by showing that there exists a bijection rom Nat[H A +, F ] F (A). For all α : H A + F, we have Φ <A,F > = α A (id A ) Also, or all a F (A), B Obj(C), HB A, we have Ψ <A,F > (a) = [F ()](a) We need to show that Ψ <A,F > (a) Nat[H+, A F ], namely or all (g : B B ) Mor(C) we have H A B Ψ <A,F > (a) B F (B) H A g F (g) H A B Ψ <A,F > (a) B F (B ) We note the ollowing: (F (g) Ψ <A,F > (a) B )() = F (g)(ψ <A,F > (a) B ()) = F (g)(f ((a)) = [F (g) F ()](a) = [F (g )](a) = [F (H A g ())](a) = Ψ <A,F > (a) B (H A g ()) = (Ψ <A,F > (a) B H A g )() Nat[H A +, F ]
27 27 We now wish to show that Ψ <A,F > Φ <A,F > = id Nat[H A +,F ] Φ <A,F > Ψ <A,F > = id F (A) For all α Nat[H+, A F ], B C, HB A, we have the ollowing: Also, note that or all a F (A), we have (Ψ <A,F > Φ <A,F > )(α) = Ψ <A,F > (Φ <A,F > (α)) = Ψ <A,F > (α A (id A )) = F ()(α A (id A )) = (F () α A )(id A ) = (α B H A )(id A) = α B (H A (id A)) = α B ( id A )) = α B () = α (Φ < A, F > Ψ <A,F > )(a) = Φ < A, F > (Ψ <A,F > (a)) = Ψ < A, F > (a) A (id A ) = F (id A )(a) = id F (A) (a) = a And so, we have that there exists an isomorphism between F (A) and Nat[H A +] or all A Obj(C) Part B We now wish to show that above-deined morphism actually deined a natural morphism, i.e. we want the ollowing diagram to commute: < A, F > Nat[H A +, F ] Φ <A,> ev < A, F >= F (A) <,µ> Nat[H op,µ] ev<,µ> < A, F > Nat[H+ A, F ] Φ <A,> ev < A, F >= F (A)
28 28 For all α Nat[H A +, F ], we have the ollowing: (Ψ <A,F > Nat[H op +, µ])(α) = Ψ <A,F >(Nat[H op +, µ](α)) = Ψ <A,F >(µ α H op + ) = (µ α H op + ) A (id A ) = (µ A α A H op A )(id A ) = (µ A α A )(H op A (id A )) = (µ A α A )(id A ) = (µ A α A )() = (µ A α A )( id A ) = (µ A α A )(H A(id A)) = (µ A α A H A)(id A) = (µ A F () α A )(id A) = (F () µ A α A )(id A) = (F () µ A )(α A (id A)) = ev <, µ > (α A (id A)) = ev <, µ > (Φ <A,F > (α)) = (ev <, µ > Φ <A,F > )(α) Thus, we have shown that there exists a natural transormation rom Nat[H, +] to ev whose components are isomorphisms. Hence, result. We note that the Yoneda embedding y : C op [C, Set ] is both ull and aithul, by noting that or all A, A Obj(C), we have as required. [C, Set][y(A), y(a )] = Nat[H+, A H A = ev < A, H A = H A + (A) = H A A = C[A, A ] = C op [A, A ] + ] + >
29 Appendix A Supplementary Deinitions A.1 Function and Classes A.1.1 Single Valued Given a unction : A B we let R be the set o all pairs (a, b) such that (a) = b or a A, b B. We say that is Single Valued, i (a, b), (a, b ) R and a = a, then b = b. A.1.2 Totally Deined Given a unction : A B we let R be the set o all pairs (a, b) such that (a) = b or a A, b B. W say that is Totally Deined, i {a A b Bs.t.(a, b) R} = A. A.1.3 Mapping A Mapping is a single-valued, totally deined unction. A.1.4 Partial Mapping A Partial Mapping is a single-valued unction. A.1.5 Relation A Relation is a unction between sets. A.2 Structures A.2.1 Directed Graph A Graph G is a quadruple < N, E, s, t > where E is a set o edges o the graph, N is a set o nodes o the graph and s, t : E N are the source and target mappings. A Graph Morphism h : G G is a quadruple < G, h n, h e, G > where h n : N N and h e : E E are mappings such that h n s = s h e and h n t = t h e. In other
30 30 words, the ollowing diagrams commute: E he E s s N hn N E he E s s N hn N A.2.2 Monoid A Monoid is a triple < M,, u > where M is a set, : M M M is an associative binary operation and u is a unit (identity) or the operation. Examples o monoids are: < N, +, 0 > < N 0,, 1 > where N 0 = N \ {0} < P(A),, > < P(A),, A > < Set[A, A],, id A > Note that a morphism between monoids h : M M is an operation preserving mapping which maps the unit to the unit. In other words, the ollowing diagrams commute: M M h h M M M M h e 1 M e M h A.2.3 Preorder A Preorder is a pair (P, ) where P is a set and is a relexive and transitive binary relation. A.2.4 Poset A Poset (partially ordered set) is a preorder whose binary relation is also anti-symmetric. A.2.5 Bounds Let < P, > be a poset and S P. Then an element z P is called a Lower Bound o S i or all s S, z s. Greatest Lower Bound o S i or all lower bounds y o S, y z. sometimes denoted S This is Upper Bound o S i or all s S, s z. Least Upper Bound o S i or all lower bounds y o S, z y. This is sometimes denoted S
31 31 A.2.6 M-Action An M-action on a ixed monoid M =< M,, u > is a pair < S, δ > where S is a set o states and δ : M S S is a mapping such that or all x, y M and s S, we have δ(x y, s) = δ(x, δ(y, s)) and δ(u, s) = s. In other words, the ollowing diagrams commute: (M M) S = M (M S) id M δ M S S = 1 S u id S M S id S M S S S δ id S δ S
1 Categories, Functors, and Natural Transformations. Discrete categories. A category is discrete when every arrow is an identity.
MacLane: Categories or Working Mathematician 1 Categories, Functors, and Natural Transormations 1.1 Axioms or Categories 1.2 Categories Discrete categories. A category is discrete when every arrow is an
More informationGENERALIZED ABSTRACT NONSENSE: CATEGORY THEORY AND ADJUNCTIONS
GENERALIZED ABSTRACT NONSENSE: CATEGORY THEORY AND ADJUNCTIONS CHRIS HENDERSON Abstract. This paper will move through the basics o category theory, eventually deining natural transormations and adjunctions
More informationCATEGORIES. 1.1 Introduction
1 CATEGORIES 1.1 Introduction What is category theory? As a irst approximation, one could say that category theory is the mathematical study o (abstract) algebras o unctions. Just as group theory is the
More informationGENERAL ABSTRACT NONSENSE
GENERAL ABSTRACT NONSENSE MARCELLO DELGADO Abstract. In this paper, we seek to understand limits, a uniying notion that brings together the ideas o pullbacks, products, and equalizers. To do this, we will
More informationCATEGORY THEORY. Cats have been around for 70 years. Eilenberg + Mac Lane =. Cats are about building bridges between different parts of maths.
CATEGORY THEORY PROFESSOR PETER JOHNSTONE Cats have been around for 70 years. Eilenberg + Mac Lane =. Cats are about building bridges between different parts of maths. Definition 1.1. A category C consists
More informationCategories and Natural Transformations
Categories and Natural Transormations Ethan Jerzak 17 August 2007 1 Introduction The motivation or studying Category Theory is to ormalise the underlying similarities between a broad range o mathematical
More informationLIMITS AND COLIMITS. m : M X. in a category G of structured sets of some sort call them gadgets the image subset
5 LIMITS ND COLIMITS In this chapter we irst briely discuss some topics namely subobjects and pullbacks relating to the deinitions that we already have. This is partly in order to see how these are used,
More informationAn Introduction to Topos Theory
An Introduction to Topos Theory Ryszard Paweł Kostecki Institute o Theoretical Physics, University o Warsaw, Hoża 69, 00-681 Warszawa, Poland email: ryszard.kostecki % uw.edu.pl June 26, 2011 Abstract
More informationHSP SUBCATEGORIES OF EILENBERG-MOORE ALGEBRAS
HSP SUBCATEGORIES OF EILENBERG-MOORE ALGEBRAS MICHAEL BARR Abstract. Given a triple T on a complete category C and a actorization system E /M on the category o algebras, we show there is a 1-1 correspondence
More informationCategory Theory. Travis Dirle. December 12, 2017
Category Theory 2 Category Theory Travis Dirle December 12, 2017 2 Contents 1 Categories 1 2 Construction on Categories 7 3 Universals and Limits 11 4 Adjoints 23 5 Limits 31 6 Generators and Projectives
More informationCategories and functors
Lecture 1 Categories and functors Definition 1.1 A category A consists of a collection ob(a) (whose elements are called the objects of A) for each A, B ob(a), a collection A(A, B) (whose elements are called
More informationCategory Theory (UMV/TK/07)
P. J. Šafárik University, Faculty of Science, Košice Project 2005/NP1-051 11230100466 Basic information Extent: 2 hrs lecture/1 hrs seminar per week. Assessment: Written tests during the semester, written
More informationTangent Categories. David M. Roberts, Urs Schreiber and Todd Trimble. September 5, 2007
Tangent Categories David M Roberts, Urs Schreiber and Todd Trimble September 5, 2007 Abstract For any n-category C we consider the sub-n-category T C C 2 o squares in C with pinned let boundary This resolves
More information3. Categories and Functors We recall the definition of a category: Definition 3.1. A category C is the data of two collections. The first collection
3. Categories and Functors We recall the definition of a category: Definition 3.1. A category C is the data of two collections. The first collection is called the objects of C and is denoted Obj(C). Given
More informationJoseph Muscat Categories. 1 December 2012
Joseph Muscat 2015 1 Categories joseph.muscat@um.edu.mt 1 December 2012 1 Objects and Morphisms category is a class o objects with morphisms : (a way o comparing/substituting/mapping/processing to ) such
More informationRepresentation Theory of Hopf Algebroids. Atsushi Yamaguchi
Representation Theory o H Algebroids Atsushi Yamaguchi Contents o this slide 1. Internal categories and H algebroids (7p) 2. Fibered category o modules (6p) 3. Representations o H algebroids (7p) 4. Restrictions
More informationBasic Category Theory
BRICS LS-95-1 J. van Oosten: Basic Category Theory BRICS Basic Research in Computer Science Basic Category Theory Jaap van Oosten BRICS Lecture Series LS-95-1 ISSN 1395-2048 January 1995 Copyright c 1995,
More informationDescent on the étale site Wouter Zomervrucht, October 14, 2014
Descent on the étale site Wouter Zomervrucht, October 14, 2014 We treat two eatures o the étale site: descent o morphisms and descent o quasi-coherent sheaves. All will also be true on the larger pp and
More informationReview of category theory
Review of category theory Proseminar on stable homotopy theory, University of Pittsburgh Friday 17 th January 2014 Friday 24 th January 2014 Clive Newstead Abstract This talk will be a review of the fundamentals
More informationThe basics of frame theory
First version released on 30 June 2006 This version released on 30 June 2006 The basics o rame theory Harold Simmons The University o Manchester hsimmons@ manchester.ac.uk This is the irst part o a series
More informationSEPARATED AND PROPER MORPHISMS
SEPARATED AND PROPER MORPHISMS BRIAN OSSERMAN The notions o separatedness and properness are the algebraic geometry analogues o the Hausdor condition and compactness in topology. For varieties over the
More informationCategory Theory. Categories. Definition.
Category Theory Category theory is a general mathematical theory of structures, systems of structures and relationships between systems of structures. It provides a unifying and economic mathematical modeling
More informationSEPARATED AND PROPER MORPHISMS
SEPARATED AND PROPER MORPHISMS BRIAN OSSERMAN Last quarter, we introduced the closed diagonal condition or a prevariety to be a prevariety, and the universally closed condition or a variety to be complete.
More informationSpan, Cospan, and Other Double Categories
ariv:1201.3789v1 [math.ct] 18 Jan 2012 Span, Cospan, and Other Double Categories Susan Nieield July 19, 2018 Abstract Given a double category D such that D 0 has pushouts, we characterize oplax/lax adjunctions
More information(C) The rationals and the reals as linearly ordered sets. Contents. 1 The characterizing results
(C) The rationals and the reals as linearly ordered sets We know that both Q and R are something special. When we think about about either o these we usually view it as a ield, or at least some kind o
More informationPART I. Abstract algebraic categories
PART I Abstract algebraic categories It should be observed first that the whole concept of category is essentially an auxiliary one; our basic concepts are those of a functor and a natural transformation.
More information1 Categorical Background
1 Categorical Background 1.1 Categories and Functors Definition 1.1.1 A category C is given by a class of objects, often denoted by ob C, and for any two objects A, B of C a proper set of morphisms C(A,
More informationLecture 15: Duality. Next we spell out the answer to Exercise It is part of the definition of a TQFT.
Lecture 15: Duality We ended the last lecture by introducing one of the main characters in the remainder of the course, a topological quantum field theory (TQFT). At this point we should, of course, elaborate
More informationVariations on a Casselman-Osborne theme
Variations on a Casselman-Osborne theme Dragan Miličić Introduction This paper is inspired by two classical results in homological algebra o modules over an enveloping algebra lemmas o Casselman-Osborne
More informationarxiv: v1 [math.ct] 27 Oct 2017
arxiv:1710.10238v1 [math.ct] 27 Oct 2017 Notes on clans and tribes. Joyal October 30, 2017 bstract The purpose o these notes is to give a categorical presentation/analysis o homotopy type theory. The notes
More information{1X } if X = Y otherwise.
C T E G O R Y T H E O R Y Dr E. L. Cheng e.cheng@dpmms.cam.ac.uk http://www.dpmms.cam.ac.uk/ elgc2 Michaelmas 2002 1 Categories, unctors and natural transormations 1.1 Categories DEFINITION 1.1.1 category
More informationVALUATIVE CRITERIA FOR SEPARATED AND PROPER MORPHISMS
VALUATIVE CRITERIA FOR SEPARATED AND PROPER MORPHISMS BRIAN OSSERMAN Recall that or prevarieties, we had criteria or being a variety or or being complete in terms o existence and uniqueness o limits, where
More informationModèles des langages de programmation Domaines, catégories, jeux. Programme de cette seconde séance:
Modèles des langages de programmation Domaines, catégories, jeux Programme de cette seconde séance: Modèle ensembliste du lambda-calcul ; Catégories cartésiennes fermées 1 Synopsis 1 the simply-typed λ-calculus,
More informationTowards a Flowchart Diagrammatic Language for Monad-based Semantics
Towards a Flowchart Diagrammatic Language or Monad-based Semantics Julian Jakob Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg julian.jakob@au.de 21.06.2016 Introductory Examples 1 2 + 3 3 9 36 4 while
More informationIn the index (pages ), reduce all page numbers by 2.
Errata or Nilpotence and periodicity in stable homotopy theory (Annals O Mathematics Study No. 28, Princeton University Press, 992) by Douglas C. Ravenel, July 2, 997, edition. Most o these were ound by
More informationVALUATIVE CRITERIA BRIAN OSSERMAN
VALUATIVE CRITERIA BRIAN OSSERMAN Intuitively, one can think o separatedness as (a relative version o) uniqueness o limits, and properness as (a relative version o) existence o (unique) limits. It is not
More informationFUNCTORS AND ADJUNCTIONS. 1. Functors
FUNCTORS AND ADJUNCTIONS Abstract. Graphs, quivers, natural transformations, adjunctions, Galois connections, Galois theory. 1.1. Graph maps. 1. Functors 1.1.1. Quivers. Quivers generalize directed graphs,
More informationThe Uniformity Principle on Traced Monoidal Categories
Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 69 (2003) URL: http://www.elsevier.nl/locate/entcs/volume69.html 19 pages The Uniormity Principle on Traced Monoidal Categories Masahito Hasegawa Research
More informationTHE HOMOTOPY THEORY OF EQUIVALENCE RELATIONS
THE HOMOTOPY THEORY OF EQUIVALENCE RELATIONS FINNUR LÁRUSSON Abstract. We give a detailed exposition o the homotopy theory o equivalence relations, perhaps the simplest nontrivial example o a model structure.
More informationConceptual Connections of Circularity and Category Theory
1/64 Conceptual Connections of Circularity and Category Theory Larry Moss Indiana University, Bloomington ESSLLI 2012, Opole 2/64 The conceptual comparison chart Filling out the details is my goal for
More information1 Introduction. 2 Categories. Mitchell Faulk June 22, 2014 Equivalence of Categories for Affine Varieties
Mitchell Faulk June 22, 2014 Equivalence of Categories for Affine Varieties 1 Introduction Recall from last time that every affine algebraic variety V A n determines a unique finitely generated, reduced
More informationA fresh perspective on canonical extensions for bounded lattices
A fresh perspective on canonical extensions for bounded lattices Mathematical Institute, University of Oxford Department of Mathematics, Matej Bel University Second International Conference on Order, Algebra
More informationCommutative Algebra Lecture 3: Lattices and Categories (Sept. 13, 2013)
Commutative Algebra Lecture 3: Lattices and Categories (Sept. 13, 2013) Navid Alaei September 17, 2013 1 Lattice Basics There are, in general, two equivalent approaches to defining a lattice; one is rather
More informationSymbol Index Group GermAnal Ring AbMonoid
Symbol Index 409 Symbol Index Symbols of standard and uncontroversial usage are generally not included here. As in the word index, boldface page-numbers indicate pages where definitions are given. If a
More informationMath 754 Chapter III: Fiber bundles. Classifying spaces. Applications
Math 754 Chapter III: Fiber bundles. Classiying spaces. Applications Laurențiu Maxim Department o Mathematics University o Wisconsin maxim@math.wisc.edu April 18, 2018 Contents 1 Fiber bundles 2 2 Principle
More informationUMS 7/2/14. Nawaz John Sultani. July 12, Abstract
UMS 7/2/14 Nawaz John Sultani July 12, 2014 Notes or July, 2 2014 UMS lecture Abstract 1 Quick Review o Universals Deinition 1.1. I S : D C is a unctor and c an object o C, a universal arrow rom c to S
More informationCartesian Closed Topological Categories and Tensor Products
Cartesian Closed Topological Categories and Tensor Products Gavin J. Seal October 21, 2003 Abstract The projective tensor product in a category of topological R-modules (where R is a topological ring)
More information9 Direct products, direct sums, and free abelian groups
9 Direct products, direct sums, and free abelian groups 9.1 Definition. A direct product of a family of groups {G i } i I is a group i I G i defined as follows. As a set i I G i is the cartesian product
More informationCOMMUTATIVE ALGEBRA LECTURE 1: SOME CATEGORY THEORY
COMMUTATIVE ALGEBRA LECTURE 1: SOME CATEGORY THEORY VIVEK SHENDE A ring is a set R with two binary operations, an addition + and a multiplication. Always there should be an identity 0 for addition, an
More informationPushouts, Pullbacks and Their Properties
Pushouts, Pullbacks and Their Properties Joonwon Choi Abstract Graph rewriting has numerous applications, such as software engineering and biology techniques. This technique is theoretically based on pushouts
More informationCLASS NOTES MATH 527 (SPRING 2011) WEEK 6
CLASS NOTES MATH 527 (SPRING 2011) WEEK 6 BERTRAND GUILLOU 1. Mon, Feb. 21 Note that since we have C() = X A C (A) and the inclusion A C (A) at time 0 is a coibration, it ollows that the pushout map i
More informationCategory Theory 1 Categories and functors
Category Theory 1 Categories and functors This is to accompany the reading of 1 7 October and the lecture of 8 October. mistakes and obscurities to T.Leinster@maths.gla.ac.uk. Please report Some questions
More informationSOME EXERCISES. This is not an assignment, though some exercises on this list might become part of an assignment. Class 2
SOME EXERCISES This is not an assignment, though some exercises on this list might become part of an assignment. Class 2 (1) Let C be a category and let X C. Prove that the assignment Y C(Y, X) is a functor
More informationExact Categories in Functional Analysis
Script Exact Categories in Functional Analysis Leonhard Frerick and Dennis Sieg June 22, 2010 ii To Susanne Dierolf. iii iv Contents 1 Basic Notions 1 1.1 Categories............................. 1 1.2
More informationMADE-TO-ORDER WEAK FACTORIZATION SYSTEMS
MADE-TO-ORDER WEAK FACTORIZATION SYSTEMS EMILY RIEHL The aim o this note is to briely summarize techniques or building weak actorization systems whose right class is characterized by a particular liting
More informationTopological algebra based on sorts and properties as free and cofree universes
Topological algebra based on sorts and properties as free and cofree universes Vaughan Pratt Stanford University BLAST 2010 CU Boulder June 2 MOTIVATION A well-structured category C should satisfy WS1-5.
More informationC2.7: CATEGORY THEORY
C2.7: CATEGORY THEORY PAVEL SAFRONOV WITH MINOR UPDATES 2019 BY FRANCES KIRWAN Contents Introduction 2 Literature 3 1. Basic definitions 3 1.1. Categories 3 1.2. Set-theoretic issues 4 1.3. Functors 5
More informationDUALITY AND SMALL FUNCTORS
DUALITY AND SMALL FUNCTORS GEORG BIEDERMANN AND BORIS CHORNY Abstract. The homotopy theory o small unctors is a useul tool or studying various questions in homotopy theory. In this paper, we develop the
More informationAlgebraic Geometry
MIT OpenCourseWare http://ocw.mit.edu 18.726 Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009 For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms. 18.726: Algebraic Geometry
More informationCHOW S LEMMA. Matthew Emerton
CHOW LEMMA Matthew Emerton The aim o this note is to prove the ollowing orm o Chow s Lemma: uppose that : is a separated inite type morphism o Noetherian schemes. Then (or some suiciently large n) there
More informationFibrations of bicategories
Fibrations o bicategories Igor Baković Faculty o Natural Sciences and Mathematics University o Split Teslina 12/III, 21000 Split, Croatia Abstract The main purpose o this work is to describe a generalization
More informationLectures on Homological Algebra. Weizhe Zheng
Lectures on Homological Algebra Weizhe Zheng Morningside Center of Mathematics Academy of Mathematics and Systems Science, Chinese Academy of Sciences Beijing 100190, China University of the Chinese Academy
More informationArrow-theoretic differential theory
Arrow-theoretic dierential theory Urs Schreiber August 17, 2007 Abstract We propose and study a notion o a tangent (n + 1)-bundle to an arbitrary n-category Despite its simplicity, this notion turns out
More informationDecomposition Methods for Representations of Quivers appearing in Topological Data Analysis
Decomposition Methods for Representations of Quivers appearing in Topological Data Analysis Erik Lindell elindel@kth.se SA114X Degree Project in Engineering Physics, First Level Supervisor: Wojtek Chacholski
More informationWeak bisimulations for coalgebras over ordered functors
Weak bisimulations or coalgebras over ordered unctors Tomasz Brengos Faculty o Mathematics and Inormation Sciences Warsaw University o Technology Koszykowa 75 00-662 Warszawa, Poland t.brengos@mini.pw.edu.pl
More informationCATEGORICAL GROTHENDIECK RINGS AND PICARD GROUPS. Contents. 1. The ring K(R) and the group Pic(R)
CATEGORICAL GROTHENDIECK RINGS AND PICARD GROUPS J. P. MAY Contents 1. The ring K(R) and the group Pic(R) 1 2. Symmetric monoidal categories, K(C), and Pic(C) 2 3. The unit endomorphism ring R(C ) 5 4.
More informationON THE CONSTRUCTION OF LIMITS AND COLIMITS IN -CATEGORIES
ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF LIMITS ND COLIMITS IN -CTEGORIES EMILY RIEHL ND DOMINIC VERITY bstract. In previous work, we introduce an axiomatic ramework within which to prove theorems about many varieties o
More informationCLASS NOTES MATH 527 (SPRING 2011) WEEK 5
CLASS NOTES MATH 527 (SPRING 2011) WEEK 5 BERTRAND GUILLOU 1. Mon, Feb. 14 The same method we used to prove the Whitehead theorem last time also gives the following result. Theorem 1.1. Let X be CW and
More informationA GLIMPSE OF ALGEBRAIC K-THEORY: Eric M. Friedlander
A GLIMPSE OF ALGEBRAIC K-THEORY: Eric M. Friedlander During the first three days of September, 1997, I had the privilege of giving a series of five lectures at the beginning of the School on Algebraic
More informationUniversity of Cape Town
The copyright o this thesis rests with the. No quotation rom it or inormation derived rom it is to be published without ull acknowledgement o the source. The thesis is to be used or private study or non-commercial
More informationCategory Theory. Steve Awodey. Carnegie Mellon University
Category Theory Steve Awodey Carnegie Mellon University in memoriam Saunders Mac Lane Preface Why write a new textbook on Category Theory, when we already have Mac Lane s Categories for the Working Mathematician?
More informationLie Algebra Cohomology
Lie Algebra Cohomology Carsten Liese 1 Chain Complexes Definition 1.1. A chain complex (C, d) of R-modules is a family {C n } n Z of R-modules, together with R-modul maps d n : C n C n 1 such that d d
More informationAdjunctions! Everywhere!
Adjunctions! Everywhere! Carnegie Mellon University Thursday 19 th September 2013 Clive Newstead Abstract What do free groups, existential quantifiers and Stone-Čech compactifications all have in common?
More informationsset(x, Y ) n = sset(x [n], Y ).
1. Symmetric monoidal categories and enriched categories In practice, categories come in nature with more structure than just sets of morphisms. This extra structure is central to all of category theory,
More informationRepresentable presheaves
Representable presheaves March 15, 2017 A presheaf on a category C is a contravariant functor F on C. In particular, for any object X Ob(C) we have the presheaf (of sets) represented by X, that is Hom
More informationCONTINUITY. 1. Continuity 1.1. Preserving limits and colimits. Suppose that F : J C and R: C D are functors. Consider the limit diagrams.
CONTINUITY Abstract. Continuity, tensor products, complete lattices, the Tarski Fixed Point Theorem, existence of adjoints, Freyd s Adjoint Functor Theorem 1. Continuity 1.1. Preserving limits and colimits.
More informationMTH 428/528. Introduction to Topology II. Elements of Algebraic Topology. Bernard Badzioch
MTH 428/528 Introduction to Topology II Elements of Algebraic Topology Bernard Badzioch 2016.12.12 Contents 1. Some Motivation.......................................................... 3 2. Categories
More informationFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Monomorphism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/monomorphism 1 of 3 24/11/2012 02:01 Monomorphism From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia In the context of abstract algebra or
More informationUniversal Classification of Topological Categories
University of Miami Scholarly Repository Open ccess Dissertations Electronic Theses and Dissertations 2012-12-05 Universal Classification of Topological Categories Marta lpar University of Miami, alpar@math.miami.edu
More informationMath 248B. Base change morphisms
Math 248B. Base change morphisms 1. Motivation A basic operation with shea cohomology is pullback. For a continuous map o topological spaces : X X and an abelian shea F on X with (topological) pullback
More informationMath 901 Notes 3 January of 33
Math 901 Notes 3 January 2012 1 of 33 Math 901 Fall 2011 Course Notes Information: These are class notes for the second year graduate level algebra course at UNL (Math 901) as taken in class and later
More informationTHE COALGEBRAIC STRUCTURE OF CELL COMPLEXES
Theory and pplications o Categories, Vol. 26, No. 11, 2012, pp. 304 330. THE COLGEBRIC STRUCTURE OF CELL COMPLEXES THOMS THORNE bstract. The relative cell complexes with respect to a generating set o coibrations
More informationBoolean Algebras, Boolean Rings and Stone s Representation Theorem
Boolean Algebras, Boolean Rings and Stone s Representation Theorem Hongtaek Jung December 27, 2017 Abstract This is a part of a supplementary note for a Logic and Set Theory course. The main goal is to
More informationMISHA GAVRILOVICH, ALEXANDER LUZGAREV, AND VLADIMIR SOSNILO PRELIMINARY DRAFT
A DECIDABLE EQUATIONAL FRAGMENT OF CATEGORY THEORY WITHOUT AUTOMORPHISMS MISHA GAVRILOVICH, ALEXANDER LUZGAREV, AND VLADIMIR SOSNILO Abstract. We record an observation of Nikolai Durov that there is a
More informationThe classifying space of a monoid
Oliver Urs Lenz The classifying space of a monoid Thesis submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Mathematics 20 December 2011 Advisor: Dr. Lenny D.J.
More informationEnriched Categories. Stephen Fitz
Enriched Categories Stephen Fitz Abstract I will introduce some of the basic concepts of Enriched Category Theory with examples of enriched categories. Contents 1 Enriched Categories 2 1.1 Introduction..............................
More informationELEMENTS IN MATHEMATICS FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE NO.14 CATEGORY THEORY. Tatsuya Hagino
1 ELEMENTS IN MTHEMTICS FOR INFORMTION SCIENCE NO.14 CTEGORY THEORY Tatsuya Haino haino@sc.keio.ac.jp 2 Set Theory Set Theory Foundation o Modern Mathematics a set a collection o elements with some property
More informationHow to glue perverse sheaves
How to glue perverse sheaves A.A. Beilinson The aim o this note [0] is to give a short, sel-contained account o the vanishing cycle constructions o perverse sheaves; e.g., or the needs o [1]. It diers
More informationWinter School on Galois Theory Luxembourg, February INTRODUCTION TO PROFINITE GROUPS Luis Ribes Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada
Winter School on Galois Theory Luxembourg, 15-24 February 2012 INTRODUCTION TO PROFINITE GROUPS Luis Ribes Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada LECTURE 3 3.1 G-MODULES 3.2 THE COMPLETE GROUP ALGEBRA 3.3
More informationLECTURE 3: RELATIVE SINGULAR HOMOLOGY
LECTURE 3: RELATIVE SINGULAR HOMOLOGY In this lecture we want to cover some basic concepts from homological algebra. These prove to be very helpful in our discussion of singular homology. The following
More informationClassification of effective GKM graphs with combinatorial type K 4
Classiication o eective GKM graphs with combinatorial type K 4 Shintarô Kuroki Department o Applied Mathematics, Faculty o Science, Okayama Uniervsity o Science, 1-1 Ridai-cho Kita-ku, Okayama 700-0005,
More informationIntroduction to Categorical Semantics for Proof Theory (OPLSS 2015)
Introduction to Categorical Semantics for Proof Theory (OPLSS 2015) Edward Morehouse Carnegie Mellon University June 2015 (revised June 15, 2015) Contents 1 asic Categories 3 1.1 Definition of a Category.......................
More informationClosure operators on sets and algebraic lattices
Closure operators on sets and algebraic lattices Sergiu Rudeanu University of Bucharest Romania Closure operators are abundant in mathematics; here are a few examples. Given an algebraic structure, such
More informationEXAMPLES AND EXERCISES IN BASIC CATEGORY THEORY
EXAMPLES AND EXERCISES IN BASIC CATEGORY THEORY 1. Categories 1.1. Generalities. I ve tried to be as consistent as possible. In particular, throughout the text below, categories will be denoted by capital
More informationDerived Categories. Mistuo Hoshino
Derived Categories Mistuo Hoshino Contents 01. Cochain complexes 02. Mapping cones 03. Homotopy categories 04. Quasi-isomorphisms 05. Mapping cylinders 06. Triangulated categories 07. Épaisse subcategories
More informationIndecomposable Quiver Representations
Indecomposable Quiver Representations Summer Project 2015 Laura Vetter September 2, 2016 Introduction The aim of my summer project was to gain some familiarity with the representation theory of finite-dimensional
More informationOperads. Spencer Liang. March 10, 2015
Operads Spencer Liang March 10, 2015 1 Introduction The notion of an operad was created in order to have a well-defined mathematical object which encodes the idea of an abstract family of composable n-ary
More informationCategories and Modules
Categories and odules Takahiro Kato arch 2, 205 BSTRCT odules (also known as profunctors or distributors) and morphisms among them subsume categories and functors and provide more general and abstract
More information1. The Method of Coalgebra
1. The Method of Coalgebra Jan Rutten CWI Amsterdam & Radboud University Nijmegen IMS, Singapore - 15 September 2016 Overview of Lecture one 1. Category theory (where coalgebra comes from) 2. Algebras
More informationDirect Limits. Mathematics 683, Fall 2013
Direct Limits Mathematics 683, Fall 2013 In this note we define direct limits and prove their basic properties. This notion is important in various places in algebra. In particular, in algebraic geometry
More information