Category Theory .... Groups and Isomorphisms .... Awodey, Section 1.5 .... ....

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion centers on the interpretation of groups as categories, specifically referencing Steve Awodey's "Category Theory" (Second Edition) and its Section 1.5 on Isomorphisms. Participants clarify that a group \( G \) can be viewed as a category with one object, where every arrow represents an element of the group. The existence of inverses for each element in \( G \) ensures that every arrow is an isomorphism, aligning with Definition 1.4 from Awodey's text. The conversation emphasizes the necessity of defining inverses correctly to establish this relationship between groups and categories.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of group theory, specifically the definition of inverses in groups.
  • Familiarity with category theory concepts, particularly isomorphisms.
  • Knowledge of monoids and their relationship to categories.
  • Ability to interpret mathematical definitions and proofs in the context of category theory.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the concept of isomorphisms in category theory, focusing on their properties and implications.
  • Review the definition of monoids as categories, particularly in Section 1.5.1 of Simmons.
  • Explore the implications of viewing algebraic structures as categories in advanced mathematics.
  • Investigate further examples of categories in mathematics to solidify understanding of the concept.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of abstract algebra, and anyone interested in the intersection of group theory and category theory will benefit from this discussion.

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading Steve Awodey's book: Category Theory (Second Edition) and am focused on Section 1.5 Isomorphisms ...

I need some further help in order to fully understand some aspects of Definition 1.4, Page 12 ... ...

The start of Section 1.5, including Definition 1.4 ... reads as follows:https://www.physicsforums.com/attachments/8355In the above text from Awodey, in Definition 1.4, we read the following:

" ... ... Thus $$G$$ is a category with one object, in which every arrow is an isomorphism. ... ... "Can someone please demonstrate a proof that in the category $$G$$ every arrow is an isomorphism ... ?Hope someone can help ...

Peter
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Recall the definition of a group.
In a group $G$, what is the definition of the inverse $g^{-1}$ of an element $g \in G$ ?

Just like we viewed monoids as categories. we now can view the group $G$ as a category. Can you describe how? You can follow the definition of monoids viewed as categories in section 1.5.1 of Simmons.

But you have to make an additional rule for the inverse $g^{-1}$ of an element $g \in G$

If you have correctly defined inverses in a group viewed as a category, you can compare this definition with the definition of an isomorphism in a general category $C$. What do you observe ?
 
steenis said:
Recall the definition of a group.
In a group $G$, what is the definition of the inverse $g^{-1}$ of an element $g \in G$ ?

Just like we viewed monoids as categories. we now can view the group $G$ as a category. Can you describe how? You can follow the definition of monoids viewed as categories in section 1.5.1 of Simmons.

But you have to make an additional rule for the inverse $g^{-1}$ of an element $g \in G$

If you have correctly defined inverses in a group viewed as a category, you can compare this definition with the definition of an isomorphism in a general category $C$. What do you observe ?
Hi Steenis ... thanks for the help ...

Well ...

... a group $$G$$ is a monoid in which every element $$x \in G$$ has an inverse: that is, for each $$x \in G$$ there exists an element $$x^{-1}$$, called the inverse of $$x$$ which is such that $$x \bullet x^{-1} = x^{-1} \bullet x = 1_G$$ ... ...

Now ... a group $$G$$ viewed as a category is a monoid: that is a category with one element $$\star$$ ... but as a group viewed as a category we have the extra condition that there exist inverses for every element (arrow).

So ... with a group $$G$$ as with a monoid, the elements are arrows ... but the existence of inverses in the case of a group means that for each arrow $$x \in G$$ there exists an arrow $$x^{-1}$$ such that $$x \circ x^{-1} = x^{-1} \circ x = 1_G$$ where $$\circ$$ is the composition of arrows ... BUT ... this is the condition for the arrow $$x : \star \to \star$$ to be an isomorphism ... ... so then because this is true for every arrow in $$G$$, we have that every arrow is an isomorphism ...Is the above correct?

Peter
 
Ok, Peter, correct
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K