Epimorphism in the functor category $[mathbf{C}^{op}, mathbf{Set}]$
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
Let $mathbf{C}$ be a small category and $alpha: F Rightarrow G$ be a morphism in the functor category $Func(mathbf{C}^{op}, mathbf{Set})$. How do I prove that $alpha$ is an epimorphism if and only if for all $A in mathbf{C}$ we have that $alpha_A : FA rightarrow GA$ is surjetive? Any tips?
category-theory
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
Let $mathbf{C}$ be a small category and $alpha: F Rightarrow G$ be a morphism in the functor category $Func(mathbf{C}^{op}, mathbf{Set})$. How do I prove that $alpha$ is an epimorphism if and only if for all $A in mathbf{C}$ we have that $alpha_A : FA rightarrow GA$ is surjetive? Any tips?
category-theory
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
Let $mathbf{C}$ be a small category and $alpha: F Rightarrow G$ be a morphism in the functor category $Func(mathbf{C}^{op}, mathbf{Set})$. How do I prove that $alpha$ is an epimorphism if and only if for all $A in mathbf{C}$ we have that $alpha_A : FA rightarrow GA$ is surjetive? Any tips?
category-theory
Let $mathbf{C}$ be a small category and $alpha: F Rightarrow G$ be a morphism in the functor category $Func(mathbf{C}^{op}, mathbf{Set})$. How do I prove that $alpha$ is an epimorphism if and only if for all $A in mathbf{C}$ we have that $alpha_A : FA rightarrow GA$ is surjetive? Any tips?
category-theory
category-theory
edited Nov 19 at 19:12
Oskar
2,6961718
2,6961718
asked Nov 19 at 18:34
H R
1608
1608
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
Let $mathcal{A}$ and $mathcal{B}$ be categories, $mathcal{F},mathcal{G}colonmathcal{A}tomathcal{B}$ be functors, $alphacolonmathcal{F}tomathcal{G}$ be a natural transformation.
If $alpha(a)$ is an epimorphism for every $aintext{Obj}(A)$, then $alpha$ is an epimorphism in $text{Func}(mathcal{A},mathcal{B})$. It is an easy exercise.
If $alpha$ is an epimorphism in $text{Func}(mathcal{A},mathcal{B})$ and $mathcal{B}$ is finitely cocomplete, then $alpha(a)$ is an epimorphism in $mathcal{B}$ for every $aintext{Obj}(mathcal{A})$. For every object $aintext{Obj}(mathcal{A})$ denote by $Delta_acolonmathbf{1}tomathcal{A}$ such functor, that $Delta_a(0)=a$. Note, that if $mathcal{B}$ is finitely cocomplete, then the inverse image functor $mathcal{B}^{Delta_a}colonmathcal{B}^{mathcal{A}}tomathcal{B}^{mathbf{1}}$ is right exact. Therefore, the evaluation functor $text{ev}_acolonmathcal{B}^{mathcal{A}}tomathcal{B}$, such that $text{ev}_a(mathcal{T})=mathcal{T}(a)$ for every $mathcal{T}intext{Func}(mathcal{A},mathcal{B})$, which is isomorphic to $mathcal{B}^{Delta_a}$, preserves epimorphisms.
Then it is sufficient to note that $mathbf{Set}$ is finitely cocomplete.
Of course, the only difficult part of the proof is the statement that the inverse image functor preserves pointwise colimits. You can read about the theory of pointwise limits/colimits in the Mac Lane's CFWM and in the Borceux's handbook.
What do you mean by $mathcal{B}^{Delta_0}$? Does $mathcal{A}$ need to have zero object?
– H R
Nov 19 at 19:21
@user435800 Inverse image functor. You can find its definition in my old answer: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1663325/…
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:25
@user435800 $mathcal{A}$ may be arbitraty.
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:26
1
@user435800 Ah, sorry, it was a typo, thanks. Not $Delta_0$, but $Delta_a$.
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:36
1
@user435800 It is a consequence of the isomorphism $mathcal{B}cong mathcal{B}^{mathbf{1}}$. Functors from the trivial category to $mathcal{B}$ "are" objects of $mathcal{B}$. And it should be noted, that they are not isomorphic in a functor category (they have different codomains), but in the arrow category of $mathbf{Cat}$.
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:42
|
show 2 more comments
up vote
2
down vote
Here is a direct calculational argument..
begin{align*}
quad& text{ each } α_A : F,A → G;A text{ is epic } \
≡ & color{green}{{text{ Definition of epic }}} \
& quad ∀ A • ∀ g,h • quad h ∘ α_A = g ∘ α_A ⇒ h = g \
≡ & color{green}{{text{ ⇒ take h,g to be transformation; ⇐ take ε,η to be constantly h,g }}} \
&quad ∀ A • ∀ η,ε • quad η_A ∘ α_A = ε_A ∘ α_A ⇒ η_A = ε_A \
≡ &color{green}{{text{ Composition of natural transformations }}} \
&quad ∀ A • ∀ η,ε • quad (η ∘ α)_A = (ε ∘ α)_A ⇒ η_A = ε_A \
≡ & color{green}{{text{ Quantifier Nesting }}} & \
& quad ∀ η,ε • ∀ A • quad (η ∘ α)_A = (ε ∘ α)_A ⇒ η_A = ε_A &\
Rightarrow & color{green}{{text{ Quantifier distributivity }}} \
& quad ∀ η,ε • left(∀ A •; (η ∘ α)_A = (ε ∘ α)_A right) ⇒ left(∀ A •; η_A = ε_Aright) \
≡ & color{green}{{text{ Extensionality }}} \
& quad ∀ η,ε •quad η ∘ α = ε ∘ α ⇒ η = ε \
≡ & color{green}{{text{ Definition of epic }}} \
& quad α text{ is epic }
end{align*}
Note that the since in Set, epic is precisely surjective, the desired result follows --more or less.
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',
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%2f3005318%2fepimorphism-in-the-functor-category-mathbfcop-mathbfset%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
Let $mathcal{A}$ and $mathcal{B}$ be categories, $mathcal{F},mathcal{G}colonmathcal{A}tomathcal{B}$ be functors, $alphacolonmathcal{F}tomathcal{G}$ be a natural transformation.
If $alpha(a)$ is an epimorphism for every $aintext{Obj}(A)$, then $alpha$ is an epimorphism in $text{Func}(mathcal{A},mathcal{B})$. It is an easy exercise.
If $alpha$ is an epimorphism in $text{Func}(mathcal{A},mathcal{B})$ and $mathcal{B}$ is finitely cocomplete, then $alpha(a)$ is an epimorphism in $mathcal{B}$ for every $aintext{Obj}(mathcal{A})$. For every object $aintext{Obj}(mathcal{A})$ denote by $Delta_acolonmathbf{1}tomathcal{A}$ such functor, that $Delta_a(0)=a$. Note, that if $mathcal{B}$ is finitely cocomplete, then the inverse image functor $mathcal{B}^{Delta_a}colonmathcal{B}^{mathcal{A}}tomathcal{B}^{mathbf{1}}$ is right exact. Therefore, the evaluation functor $text{ev}_acolonmathcal{B}^{mathcal{A}}tomathcal{B}$, such that $text{ev}_a(mathcal{T})=mathcal{T}(a)$ for every $mathcal{T}intext{Func}(mathcal{A},mathcal{B})$, which is isomorphic to $mathcal{B}^{Delta_a}$, preserves epimorphisms.
Then it is sufficient to note that $mathbf{Set}$ is finitely cocomplete.
Of course, the only difficult part of the proof is the statement that the inverse image functor preserves pointwise colimits. You can read about the theory of pointwise limits/colimits in the Mac Lane's CFWM and in the Borceux's handbook.
What do you mean by $mathcal{B}^{Delta_0}$? Does $mathcal{A}$ need to have zero object?
– H R
Nov 19 at 19:21
@user435800 Inverse image functor. You can find its definition in my old answer: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1663325/…
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:25
@user435800 $mathcal{A}$ may be arbitraty.
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:26
1
@user435800 Ah, sorry, it was a typo, thanks. Not $Delta_0$, but $Delta_a$.
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:36
1
@user435800 It is a consequence of the isomorphism $mathcal{B}cong mathcal{B}^{mathbf{1}}$. Functors from the trivial category to $mathcal{B}$ "are" objects of $mathcal{B}$. And it should be noted, that they are not isomorphic in a functor category (they have different codomains), but in the arrow category of $mathbf{Cat}$.
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:42
|
show 2 more comments
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
Let $mathcal{A}$ and $mathcal{B}$ be categories, $mathcal{F},mathcal{G}colonmathcal{A}tomathcal{B}$ be functors, $alphacolonmathcal{F}tomathcal{G}$ be a natural transformation.
If $alpha(a)$ is an epimorphism for every $aintext{Obj}(A)$, then $alpha$ is an epimorphism in $text{Func}(mathcal{A},mathcal{B})$. It is an easy exercise.
If $alpha$ is an epimorphism in $text{Func}(mathcal{A},mathcal{B})$ and $mathcal{B}$ is finitely cocomplete, then $alpha(a)$ is an epimorphism in $mathcal{B}$ for every $aintext{Obj}(mathcal{A})$. For every object $aintext{Obj}(mathcal{A})$ denote by $Delta_acolonmathbf{1}tomathcal{A}$ such functor, that $Delta_a(0)=a$. Note, that if $mathcal{B}$ is finitely cocomplete, then the inverse image functor $mathcal{B}^{Delta_a}colonmathcal{B}^{mathcal{A}}tomathcal{B}^{mathbf{1}}$ is right exact. Therefore, the evaluation functor $text{ev}_acolonmathcal{B}^{mathcal{A}}tomathcal{B}$, such that $text{ev}_a(mathcal{T})=mathcal{T}(a)$ for every $mathcal{T}intext{Func}(mathcal{A},mathcal{B})$, which is isomorphic to $mathcal{B}^{Delta_a}$, preserves epimorphisms.
Then it is sufficient to note that $mathbf{Set}$ is finitely cocomplete.
Of course, the only difficult part of the proof is the statement that the inverse image functor preserves pointwise colimits. You can read about the theory of pointwise limits/colimits in the Mac Lane's CFWM and in the Borceux's handbook.
What do you mean by $mathcal{B}^{Delta_0}$? Does $mathcal{A}$ need to have zero object?
– H R
Nov 19 at 19:21
@user435800 Inverse image functor. You can find its definition in my old answer: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1663325/…
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:25
@user435800 $mathcal{A}$ may be arbitraty.
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:26
1
@user435800 Ah, sorry, it was a typo, thanks. Not $Delta_0$, but $Delta_a$.
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:36
1
@user435800 It is a consequence of the isomorphism $mathcal{B}cong mathcal{B}^{mathbf{1}}$. Functors from the trivial category to $mathcal{B}$ "are" objects of $mathcal{B}$. And it should be noted, that they are not isomorphic in a functor category (they have different codomains), but in the arrow category of $mathbf{Cat}$.
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:42
|
show 2 more comments
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
Let $mathcal{A}$ and $mathcal{B}$ be categories, $mathcal{F},mathcal{G}colonmathcal{A}tomathcal{B}$ be functors, $alphacolonmathcal{F}tomathcal{G}$ be a natural transformation.
If $alpha(a)$ is an epimorphism for every $aintext{Obj}(A)$, then $alpha$ is an epimorphism in $text{Func}(mathcal{A},mathcal{B})$. It is an easy exercise.
If $alpha$ is an epimorphism in $text{Func}(mathcal{A},mathcal{B})$ and $mathcal{B}$ is finitely cocomplete, then $alpha(a)$ is an epimorphism in $mathcal{B}$ for every $aintext{Obj}(mathcal{A})$. For every object $aintext{Obj}(mathcal{A})$ denote by $Delta_acolonmathbf{1}tomathcal{A}$ such functor, that $Delta_a(0)=a$. Note, that if $mathcal{B}$ is finitely cocomplete, then the inverse image functor $mathcal{B}^{Delta_a}colonmathcal{B}^{mathcal{A}}tomathcal{B}^{mathbf{1}}$ is right exact. Therefore, the evaluation functor $text{ev}_acolonmathcal{B}^{mathcal{A}}tomathcal{B}$, such that $text{ev}_a(mathcal{T})=mathcal{T}(a)$ for every $mathcal{T}intext{Func}(mathcal{A},mathcal{B})$, which is isomorphic to $mathcal{B}^{Delta_a}$, preserves epimorphisms.
Then it is sufficient to note that $mathbf{Set}$ is finitely cocomplete.
Of course, the only difficult part of the proof is the statement that the inverse image functor preserves pointwise colimits. You can read about the theory of pointwise limits/colimits in the Mac Lane's CFWM and in the Borceux's handbook.
Let $mathcal{A}$ and $mathcal{B}$ be categories, $mathcal{F},mathcal{G}colonmathcal{A}tomathcal{B}$ be functors, $alphacolonmathcal{F}tomathcal{G}$ be a natural transformation.
If $alpha(a)$ is an epimorphism for every $aintext{Obj}(A)$, then $alpha$ is an epimorphism in $text{Func}(mathcal{A},mathcal{B})$. It is an easy exercise.
If $alpha$ is an epimorphism in $text{Func}(mathcal{A},mathcal{B})$ and $mathcal{B}$ is finitely cocomplete, then $alpha(a)$ is an epimorphism in $mathcal{B}$ for every $aintext{Obj}(mathcal{A})$. For every object $aintext{Obj}(mathcal{A})$ denote by $Delta_acolonmathbf{1}tomathcal{A}$ such functor, that $Delta_a(0)=a$. Note, that if $mathcal{B}$ is finitely cocomplete, then the inverse image functor $mathcal{B}^{Delta_a}colonmathcal{B}^{mathcal{A}}tomathcal{B}^{mathbf{1}}$ is right exact. Therefore, the evaluation functor $text{ev}_acolonmathcal{B}^{mathcal{A}}tomathcal{B}$, such that $text{ev}_a(mathcal{T})=mathcal{T}(a)$ for every $mathcal{T}intext{Func}(mathcal{A},mathcal{B})$, which is isomorphic to $mathcal{B}^{Delta_a}$, preserves epimorphisms.
Then it is sufficient to note that $mathbf{Set}$ is finitely cocomplete.
Of course, the only difficult part of the proof is the statement that the inverse image functor preserves pointwise colimits. You can read about the theory of pointwise limits/colimits in the Mac Lane's CFWM and in the Borceux's handbook.
edited Nov 19 at 19:31
answered Nov 19 at 19:04
Oskar
2,6961718
2,6961718
What do you mean by $mathcal{B}^{Delta_0}$? Does $mathcal{A}$ need to have zero object?
– H R
Nov 19 at 19:21
@user435800 Inverse image functor. You can find its definition in my old answer: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1663325/…
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:25
@user435800 $mathcal{A}$ may be arbitraty.
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:26
1
@user435800 Ah, sorry, it was a typo, thanks. Not $Delta_0$, but $Delta_a$.
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:36
1
@user435800 It is a consequence of the isomorphism $mathcal{B}cong mathcal{B}^{mathbf{1}}$. Functors from the trivial category to $mathcal{B}$ "are" objects of $mathcal{B}$. And it should be noted, that they are not isomorphic in a functor category (they have different codomains), but in the arrow category of $mathbf{Cat}$.
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:42
|
show 2 more comments
What do you mean by $mathcal{B}^{Delta_0}$? Does $mathcal{A}$ need to have zero object?
– H R
Nov 19 at 19:21
@user435800 Inverse image functor. You can find its definition in my old answer: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1663325/…
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:25
@user435800 $mathcal{A}$ may be arbitraty.
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:26
1
@user435800 Ah, sorry, it was a typo, thanks. Not $Delta_0$, but $Delta_a$.
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:36
1
@user435800 It is a consequence of the isomorphism $mathcal{B}cong mathcal{B}^{mathbf{1}}$. Functors from the trivial category to $mathcal{B}$ "are" objects of $mathcal{B}$. And it should be noted, that they are not isomorphic in a functor category (they have different codomains), but in the arrow category of $mathbf{Cat}$.
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:42
What do you mean by $mathcal{B}^{Delta_0}$? Does $mathcal{A}$ need to have zero object?
– H R
Nov 19 at 19:21
What do you mean by $mathcal{B}^{Delta_0}$? Does $mathcal{A}$ need to have zero object?
– H R
Nov 19 at 19:21
@user435800 Inverse image functor. You can find its definition in my old answer: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1663325/…
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:25
@user435800 Inverse image functor. You can find its definition in my old answer: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1663325/…
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:25
@user435800 $mathcal{A}$ may be arbitraty.
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:26
@user435800 $mathcal{A}$ may be arbitraty.
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:26
1
1
@user435800 Ah, sorry, it was a typo, thanks. Not $Delta_0$, but $Delta_a$.
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:36
@user435800 Ah, sorry, it was a typo, thanks. Not $Delta_0$, but $Delta_a$.
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:36
1
1
@user435800 It is a consequence of the isomorphism $mathcal{B}cong mathcal{B}^{mathbf{1}}$. Functors from the trivial category to $mathcal{B}$ "are" objects of $mathcal{B}$. And it should be noted, that they are not isomorphic in a functor category (they have different codomains), but in the arrow category of $mathbf{Cat}$.
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:42
@user435800 It is a consequence of the isomorphism $mathcal{B}cong mathcal{B}^{mathbf{1}}$. Functors from the trivial category to $mathcal{B}$ "are" objects of $mathcal{B}$. And it should be noted, that they are not isomorphic in a functor category (they have different codomains), but in the arrow category of $mathbf{Cat}$.
– Oskar
Nov 19 at 19:42
|
show 2 more comments
up vote
2
down vote
Here is a direct calculational argument..
begin{align*}
quad& text{ each } α_A : F,A → G;A text{ is epic } \
≡ & color{green}{{text{ Definition of epic }}} \
& quad ∀ A • ∀ g,h • quad h ∘ α_A = g ∘ α_A ⇒ h = g \
≡ & color{green}{{text{ ⇒ take h,g to be transformation; ⇐ take ε,η to be constantly h,g }}} \
&quad ∀ A • ∀ η,ε • quad η_A ∘ α_A = ε_A ∘ α_A ⇒ η_A = ε_A \
≡ &color{green}{{text{ Composition of natural transformations }}} \
&quad ∀ A • ∀ η,ε • quad (η ∘ α)_A = (ε ∘ α)_A ⇒ η_A = ε_A \
≡ & color{green}{{text{ Quantifier Nesting }}} & \
& quad ∀ η,ε • ∀ A • quad (η ∘ α)_A = (ε ∘ α)_A ⇒ η_A = ε_A &\
Rightarrow & color{green}{{text{ Quantifier distributivity }}} \
& quad ∀ η,ε • left(∀ A •; (η ∘ α)_A = (ε ∘ α)_A right) ⇒ left(∀ A •; η_A = ε_Aright) \
≡ & color{green}{{text{ Extensionality }}} \
& quad ∀ η,ε •quad η ∘ α = ε ∘ α ⇒ η = ε \
≡ & color{green}{{text{ Definition of epic }}} \
& quad α text{ is epic }
end{align*}
Note that the since in Set, epic is precisely surjective, the desired result follows --more or less.
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
Here is a direct calculational argument..
begin{align*}
quad& text{ each } α_A : F,A → G;A text{ is epic } \
≡ & color{green}{{text{ Definition of epic }}} \
& quad ∀ A • ∀ g,h • quad h ∘ α_A = g ∘ α_A ⇒ h = g \
≡ & color{green}{{text{ ⇒ take h,g to be transformation; ⇐ take ε,η to be constantly h,g }}} \
&quad ∀ A • ∀ η,ε • quad η_A ∘ α_A = ε_A ∘ α_A ⇒ η_A = ε_A \
≡ &color{green}{{text{ Composition of natural transformations }}} \
&quad ∀ A • ∀ η,ε • quad (η ∘ α)_A = (ε ∘ α)_A ⇒ η_A = ε_A \
≡ & color{green}{{text{ Quantifier Nesting }}} & \
& quad ∀ η,ε • ∀ A • quad (η ∘ α)_A = (ε ∘ α)_A ⇒ η_A = ε_A &\
Rightarrow & color{green}{{text{ Quantifier distributivity }}} \
& quad ∀ η,ε • left(∀ A •; (η ∘ α)_A = (ε ∘ α)_A right) ⇒ left(∀ A •; η_A = ε_Aright) \
≡ & color{green}{{text{ Extensionality }}} \
& quad ∀ η,ε •quad η ∘ α = ε ∘ α ⇒ η = ε \
≡ & color{green}{{text{ Definition of epic }}} \
& quad α text{ is epic }
end{align*}
Note that the since in Set, epic is precisely surjective, the desired result follows --more or less.
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
Here is a direct calculational argument..
begin{align*}
quad& text{ each } α_A : F,A → G;A text{ is epic } \
≡ & color{green}{{text{ Definition of epic }}} \
& quad ∀ A • ∀ g,h • quad h ∘ α_A = g ∘ α_A ⇒ h = g \
≡ & color{green}{{text{ ⇒ take h,g to be transformation; ⇐ take ε,η to be constantly h,g }}} \
&quad ∀ A • ∀ η,ε • quad η_A ∘ α_A = ε_A ∘ α_A ⇒ η_A = ε_A \
≡ &color{green}{{text{ Composition of natural transformations }}} \
&quad ∀ A • ∀ η,ε • quad (η ∘ α)_A = (ε ∘ α)_A ⇒ η_A = ε_A \
≡ & color{green}{{text{ Quantifier Nesting }}} & \
& quad ∀ η,ε • ∀ A • quad (η ∘ α)_A = (ε ∘ α)_A ⇒ η_A = ε_A &\
Rightarrow & color{green}{{text{ Quantifier distributivity }}} \
& quad ∀ η,ε • left(∀ A •; (η ∘ α)_A = (ε ∘ α)_A right) ⇒ left(∀ A •; η_A = ε_Aright) \
≡ & color{green}{{text{ Extensionality }}} \
& quad ∀ η,ε •quad η ∘ α = ε ∘ α ⇒ η = ε \
≡ & color{green}{{text{ Definition of epic }}} \
& quad α text{ is epic }
end{align*}
Note that the since in Set, epic is precisely surjective, the desired result follows --more or less.
Here is a direct calculational argument..
begin{align*}
quad& text{ each } α_A : F,A → G;A text{ is epic } \
≡ & color{green}{{text{ Definition of epic }}} \
& quad ∀ A • ∀ g,h • quad h ∘ α_A = g ∘ α_A ⇒ h = g \
≡ & color{green}{{text{ ⇒ take h,g to be transformation; ⇐ take ε,η to be constantly h,g }}} \
&quad ∀ A • ∀ η,ε • quad η_A ∘ α_A = ε_A ∘ α_A ⇒ η_A = ε_A \
≡ &color{green}{{text{ Composition of natural transformations }}} \
&quad ∀ A • ∀ η,ε • quad (η ∘ α)_A = (ε ∘ α)_A ⇒ η_A = ε_A \
≡ & color{green}{{text{ Quantifier Nesting }}} & \
& quad ∀ η,ε • ∀ A • quad (η ∘ α)_A = (ε ∘ α)_A ⇒ η_A = ε_A &\
Rightarrow & color{green}{{text{ Quantifier distributivity }}} \
& quad ∀ η,ε • left(∀ A •; (η ∘ α)_A = (ε ∘ α)_A right) ⇒ left(∀ A •; η_A = ε_Aright) \
≡ & color{green}{{text{ Extensionality }}} \
& quad ∀ η,ε •quad η ∘ α = ε ∘ α ⇒ η = ε \
≡ & color{green}{{text{ Definition of epic }}} \
& quad α text{ is epic }
end{align*}
Note that the since in Set, epic is precisely surjective, the desired result follows --more or less.
answered Nov 19 at 23:10
Musa Al-hassy
1,2971711
1,2971711
add a comment |
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%2f3005318%2fepimorphism-in-the-functor-category-mathbfcop-mathbfset%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