The functor category $A^J$ is abelian category if $A$ is abelian
$begingroup$
I want to show that the functor category $A^J$ is an abelian category if $A$ is an abelian category. I know it's easy to define a null object, binary biproducts, kernels, and cokernels.
But I got stuck on the last condition that every monomorphism is a kernel, and every epimorphism is a cokernel.
Suppose that $alpha colon S to T$ is a natural transformation, and it's a monomorphism in $A^J$, but I don't think we can conclude that $alpha_j colon S_j to T_j$ is a monomorphism in $A$. Then it's difficult to verify the last condition by universal properties.
UPADATE:
My solution I think we can conclude $ker alpha=0$ if $alpha$ is monic. Since if $alpha circ beta =0$, then $beta = 0$ ($alpha$ is monic) factors
through $ker alpha =0$. So it's obvious that the last condition holds for $A^J$.
Could you tell me whether my solution is right? Thank you.
category-theory abelian-categories
edited Dec 17 '18 at 13:45
Namaste
1
asked Dec 16 '18 at 15:25
Kai XingKai Xing
535
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I want to show that the functor category $A^J$ is an abelian category if $A$ is an abelian category. I know it's easy to define a null object, binary biproducts, kernels, and cokernels.
But I got stuck on the last condition that every monomorphism is a kernel, and every epimorphism is a cokernel.
Suppose that $alpha colon S to T$ is a natural transformation, and it's a monomorphism in $A^J$, but I don't think we can conclude that $alpha_j colon S_j to T_j$ is a monomorphism in $A$. Then it's difficult to verify the last condition by universal properties.
UPADATE:
My solution I think we can conclude $ker alpha=0$ if $alpha$ is monic. Since if $alpha circ beta =0$, then $beta = 0$ ($alpha$ is monic) factors
through $ker alpha =0$. So it's obvious that the last condition holds for $A^J$.
Could you tell me whether my solution is right? Thank you.
category-theory abelian-categories
edited Dec 17 '18 at 13:45
Namaste
1
asked Dec 16 '18 at 15:25
Kai XingKai Xing
535
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Can you explain what $A^J$ means?
$endgroup$
– user593746
Dec 17 '18 at 15:04
$begingroup$
@Zvi It's a functor category whose objects are the functors from $J$ to $A$ and morphisms are natural transformation.
$endgroup$
– Kai Xing
Dec 17 '18 at 15:54
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I want to show that the functor category $A^J$ is an abelian category if $A$ is an abelian category. I know it's easy to define a null object, binary biproducts, kernels, and cokernels.
But I got stuck on the last condition that every monomorphism is a kernel, and every epimorphism is a cokernel.
Suppose that $alpha colon S to T$ is a natural transformation, and it's a monomorphism in $A^J$, but I don't think we can conclude that $alpha_j colon S_j to T_j$ is a monomorphism in $A$. Then it's difficult to verify the last condition by universal properties.
UPADATE:
My solution I think we can conclude $ker alpha=0$ if $alpha$ is monic. Since if $alpha circ beta =0$, then $beta = 0$ ($alpha$ is monic) factors
through $ker alpha =0$. So it's obvious that the last condition holds for $A^J$.
Could you tell me whether my solution is right? Thank you.
category-theory abelian-categories
edited Dec 17 '18 at 13:45
Namaste
1
asked Dec 16 '18 at 15:25
Kai XingKai Xing
535
$endgroup$
I want to show that the functor category $A^J$ is an abelian category if $A$ is an abelian category. I know it's easy to define a null object, binary biproducts, kernels, and cokernels.
But I got stuck on the last condition that every monomorphism is a kernel, and every epimorphism is a cokernel.
Suppose that $alpha colon S to T$ is a natural transformation, and it's a monomorphism in $A^J$, but I don't think we can conclude that $alpha_j colon S_j to T_j$ is a monomorphism in $A$. Then it's difficult to verify the last condition by universal properties.
UPADATE:
My solution I think we can conclude $ker alpha=0$ if $alpha$ is monic. Since if $alpha circ beta =0$, then $beta = 0$ ($alpha$ is monic) factors
through $ker alpha =0$. So it's obvious that the last condition holds for $A^J$.
Could you tell me whether my solution is right? Thank you.
category-theory abelian-categories
category-theory abelian-categories
edited Dec 17 '18 at 13:45
Namaste
1
asked Dec 16 '18 at 15:25
Kai XingKai Xing
535
edited Dec 17 '18 at 13:45
Namaste
1
asked Dec 16 '18 at 15:25
Kai XingKai Xing
535
edited Dec 17 '18 at 13:45
Namaste
1
edited Dec 17 '18 at 13:45
Namaste
1
edited Dec 17 '18 at 13:45
Namaste
1
1
asked Dec 16 '18 at 15:25
Kai XingKai Xing
535
asked Dec 16 '18 at 15:25
Kai XingKai Xing
535
asked Dec 16 '18 at 15:25
Kai XingKai Xing
535
535
$begingroup$
Can you explain what $A^J$ means?
$endgroup$
– user593746
Dec 17 '18 at 15:04
$begingroup$
@Zvi It's a functor category whose objects are the functors from $J$ to $A$ and morphisms are natural transformation.
$endgroup$
– Kai Xing
Dec 17 '18 at 15:54
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Can you explain what $A^J$ means?
$endgroup$
– user593746
Dec 17 '18 at 15:04
$begingroup$
@Zvi It's a functor category whose objects are the functors from $J$ to $A$ and morphisms are natural transformation.
$endgroup$
– Kai Xing
Dec 17 '18 at 15:54
$begingroup$
Can you explain what $A^J$ means?
$endgroup$
– user593746
Dec 17 '18 at 15:04
$begingroup$
Can you explain what $A^J$ means?
$endgroup$
– user593746
Dec 17 '18 at 15:04
$begingroup$
@Zvi It's a functor category whose objects are the functors from $J$ to $A$ and morphisms are natural transformation.
$endgroup$
– Kai Xing
Dec 17 '18 at 15:54
$begingroup$
@Zvi It's a functor category whose objects are the functors from $J$ to $A$ and morphisms are natural transformation.
$endgroup$
– Kai Xing
Dec 17 '18 at 15:54
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
In general, it is true that the components a natural transformation may not be monomorphisms even when the natural transformation is. Relatedly, a limit of functors can exist but fail to be computed pointwise. However, assuming all the limits of a particular shape exist in the target category, then limits of that shape will exist in the functor category and be computed pointwise.1
Now, $f:Xto Y$ is a monomorphism if and only if $$require{AMScd}begin{CD}X@>id>>X\@VidVV@VVfV\X@>>f> Yend{CD}$$ is a pullback square.2 Therefore, if $alpha:Sto T$ is a monomorphism, then $S$ is a pullback of $alpha$ along itself that's witnessed by the identity natural transformation. If the underlying category has all (binary) pullbacks, which Abelian categories do1, then the pullback in the functor category is calculated by pullbacks of the same shape in the target category. The components of the identity natural transformation are identity arrows, so those pullbacks are also witnessed by identities. Thus all the components are monomorphisms.
Dualize this for epimorphisms.
1 You should prove this if you haven't before.
2 I would suggest proving this too, but there's nothing to prove. If you write out what the universal property of that pullback is, it just is the statement that $f$ is a monomorphism. You should see this for yourself though.
answered Dec 16 '18 at 19:30
Derek ElkinsDerek Elkins
17.1k11437
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thank for your patient answer!
$endgroup$
– Kai Xing
Dec 17 '18 at 9:50
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
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%2f3042724%2fthe-functor-category-aj-is-abelian-category-if-a-is-abelian%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
In general, it is true that the components a natural transformation may not be monomorphisms even when the natural transformation is. Relatedly, a limit of functors can exist but fail to be computed pointwise. However, assuming all the limits of a particular shape exist in the target category, then limits of that shape will exist in the functor category and be computed pointwise.1
Now, $f:Xto Y$ is a monomorphism if and only if $$require{AMScd}begin{CD}X@>id>>X\@VidVV@VVfV\X@>>f> Yend{CD}$$ is a pullback square.2 Therefore, if $alpha:Sto T$ is a monomorphism, then $S$ is a pullback of $alpha$ along itself that's witnessed by the identity natural transformation. If the underlying category has all (binary) pullbacks, which Abelian categories do1, then the pullback in the functor category is calculated by pullbacks of the same shape in the target category. The components of the identity natural transformation are identity arrows, so those pullbacks are also witnessed by identities. Thus all the components are monomorphisms.
Dualize this for epimorphisms.
1 You should prove this if you haven't before.
2 I would suggest proving this too, but there's nothing to prove. If you write out what the universal property of that pullback is, it just is the statement that $f$ is a monomorphism. You should see this for yourself though.
answered Dec 16 '18 at 19:30
Derek ElkinsDerek Elkins
17.1k11437
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thank for your patient answer!
$endgroup$
– Kai Xing
Dec 17 '18 at 9:50
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In general, it is true that the components a natural transformation may not be monomorphisms even when the natural transformation is. Relatedly, a limit of functors can exist but fail to be computed pointwise. However, assuming all the limits of a particular shape exist in the target category, then limits of that shape will exist in the functor category and be computed pointwise.1
Now, $f:Xto Y$ is a monomorphism if and only if $$require{AMScd}begin{CD}X@>id>>X\@VidVV@VVfV\X@>>f> Yend{CD}$$ is a pullback square.2 Therefore, if $alpha:Sto T$ is a monomorphism, then $S$ is a pullback of $alpha$ along itself that's witnessed by the identity natural transformation. If the underlying category has all (binary) pullbacks, which Abelian categories do1, then the pullback in the functor category is calculated by pullbacks of the same shape in the target category. The components of the identity natural transformation are identity arrows, so those pullbacks are also witnessed by identities. Thus all the components are monomorphisms.
Dualize this for epimorphisms.
1 You should prove this if you haven't before.
2 I would suggest proving this too, but there's nothing to prove. If you write out what the universal property of that pullback is, it just is the statement that $f$ is a monomorphism. You should see this for yourself though.
answered Dec 16 '18 at 19:30
Derek ElkinsDerek Elkins
17.1k11437
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thank for your patient answer!
$endgroup$
– Kai Xing
Dec 17 '18 at 9:50
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In general, it is true that the components a natural transformation may not be monomorphisms even when the natural transformation is. Relatedly, a limit of functors can exist but fail to be computed pointwise. However, assuming all the limits of a particular shape exist in the target category, then limits of that shape will exist in the functor category and be computed pointwise.1
Now, $f:Xto Y$ is a monomorphism if and only if $$require{AMScd}begin{CD}X@>id>>X\@VidVV@VVfV\X@>>f> Yend{CD}$$ is a pullback square.2 Therefore, if $alpha:Sto T$ is a monomorphism, then $S$ is a pullback of $alpha$ along itself that's witnessed by the identity natural transformation. If the underlying category has all (binary) pullbacks, which Abelian categories do1, then the pullback in the functor category is calculated by pullbacks of the same shape in the target category. The components of the identity natural transformation are identity arrows, so those pullbacks are also witnessed by identities. Thus all the components are monomorphisms.
Dualize this for epimorphisms.
1 You should prove this if you haven't before.
2 I would suggest proving this too, but there's nothing to prove. If you write out what the universal property of that pullback is, it just is the statement that $f$ is a monomorphism. You should see this for yourself though.
answered Dec 16 '18 at 19:30
Derek ElkinsDerek Elkins
17.1k11437
$endgroup$
In general, it is true that the components a natural transformation may not be monomorphisms even when the natural transformation is. Relatedly, a limit of functors can exist but fail to be computed pointwise. However, assuming all the limits of a particular shape exist in the target category, then limits of that shape will exist in the functor category and be computed pointwise.1
Now, $f:Xto Y$ is a monomorphism if and only if $$require{AMScd}begin{CD}X@>id>>X\@VidVV@VVfV\X@>>f> Yend{CD}$$ is a pullback square.2 Therefore, if $alpha:Sto T$ is a monomorphism, then $S$ is a pullback of $alpha$ along itself that's witnessed by the identity natural transformation. If the underlying category has all (binary) pullbacks, which Abelian categories do1, then the pullback in the functor category is calculated by pullbacks of the same shape in the target category. The components of the identity natural transformation are identity arrows, so those pullbacks are also witnessed by identities. Thus all the components are monomorphisms.
Dualize this for epimorphisms.
1 You should prove this if you haven't before.
2 I would suggest proving this too, but there's nothing to prove. If you write out what the universal property of that pullback is, it just is the statement that $f$ is a monomorphism. You should see this for yourself though.
answered Dec 16 '18 at 19:30
Derek ElkinsDerek Elkins
17.1k11437
edited Dec 17 '18 at 11:33
answered Dec 16 '18 at 19:30
Derek ElkinsDerek Elkins
17.1k11437
answered Dec 16 '18 at 19:30
Derek ElkinsDerek Elkins
17.1k11437
answered Dec 16 '18 at 19:30
Derek ElkinsDerek Elkins
17.1k11437
17.1k11437
$begingroup$
Thank for your patient answer!
$endgroup$
– Kai Xing
Dec 17 '18 at 9:50
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Thank for your patient answer!
$endgroup$
– Kai Xing
Dec 17 '18 at 9:50
$begingroup$
Thank for your patient answer!
$endgroup$
– Kai Xing
Dec 17 '18 at 9:50
$begingroup$
Thank for your patient answer!
$endgroup$
– Kai Xing
Dec 17 '18 at 9:50
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.
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%2f3042724%2fthe-functor-category-aj-is-abelian-category-if-a-is-abelian%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
$begingroup$
Can you explain what $A^J$ means?
$endgroup$
– user593746
Dec 17 '18 at 15:04
$begingroup$
@Zvi It's a functor category whose objects are the functors from $J$ to $A$ and morphisms are natural transformation.
$endgroup$
– Kai Xing
Dec 17 '18 at 15:54