MHB Category Theory - Initial and Final Objects

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading Paolo Aluffi's book, Algebra: Chapter 0.

I am currently focused on Chapter I, Section 5: Universal Properties.

I need some help Example 5.3 and Exercise 5.2 in this section.
QUESTION 1Example 5.3 reads as follows:View attachment 4484

Can someone clearly explain why $$\emptyset$$ is initial ...

We need every set $$A$$ in the category Set to have exactly one morphism (set function):

$$\emptyset \rightarrow A$$

and Aluffi seems to be saying that the 'empty graph' ( an "empty or nothing function" ? ) is the unique function from $$\emptyset$$ to $$A$$ ... is that right ...?

It seems a highly contrived function (morphism) ... indeed, what is the empty graph exactly ... and how do we rigorously justify the assertion that it is actually a function ...

Can someone please explain clearly just what Aluffi is saying here ... ?
QUESTION 2

Exercise 5.2 in Chapter I, Section 5 reads as follows:View attachment 4485Can someone show me how to construct a rigorous and formal proof for this exercise ... ?Help will be much appreciated ...

PeterPeter
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Peter,

It could be useful to remember that a function between two given sets $A, B$ is a subset of $A \times B$ (with some other properties, of course)
 
Peter,

I've given this explanation to you before (that $\emptyset$ is initial in Set), but it's been a while and it doesn't hurt to reiterate. ;) Let $A$ be a set. A morphism $\emptyset \to A$ is a relation from $\emptyset$ to $A$, i.e., a subset $R$ of $\emptyset \times A$ such that for every $x \in \emptyset$, there is a unique $a \in A$ such that $(x,a) \in R$. Now since $\emptyset \times A = \emptyset$, $R = \emptyset$. So there is only one morphism $\emptyset \to A$.

Now let $X$ be a set such that for every set $A$, there is exactly one morphism $X \to A$. Then in particular, there is only one moprhism $X \to \emptyset$. Every element of $X$ maps to only one element of $\emptyset$; this cannot happen unless $X = \emptyset$. There, $\emptyset$ is the unique initial object in Set.
 
Euge said:
Peter,

I've given this explanation to you before (that $\emptyset$ is initial in Set), but it's been a while and it doesn't hurt to reiterate. ;) Let $A$ be a set. A morphism $\emptyset \to A$ is a relation from $\emptyset$ to $A$, i.e., a subset $R$ of $\emptyset \times A$ such that for every $x \in \emptyset$, there is a unique $a \in A$ such that $(x,a) \in R$. Now since $\emptyset \times A = \emptyset$, $R = \emptyset$. So there is only one morphism $\emptyset \to A$.

Now let $X$ be a set such that for every set $A$, there is exactly one morphism $X \to A$. Then in particular, there is only one moprhism $X \to \emptyset$. Every element of $X$ maps to only one element of $\emptyset$; this cannot happen unless $X = \emptyset$. There, $\emptyset$ is the unique initial object in Set.
Thanks for for that post, Euge ... It is most helpful and clear ...

My apologies for forgetting the advice and help that you gave some time earlier ...

Peter

- - - Updated - - -

Fallen Angel said:
Hi Peter,

It could be useful to remember that a function between two given sets $A, B$ is a subset of $A \times B$ (with some other properties, of course)

indeed ... a helpful point that is essentially the clue to the situation ... Thanks Fallen Angel ..

Peter
 
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
When decomposing a representation ##\rho## of a finite group ##G## into irreducible representations, we can find the number of times the representation contains a particular irrep ##\rho_0## through the character inner product $$ \langle \chi, \chi_0\rangle = \frac{1}{|G|} \sum_{g\in G} \chi(g) \chi_0(g)^*$$ where ##\chi## and ##\chi_0## are the characters of ##\rho## and ##\rho_0##, respectively. Since all group elements in the same conjugacy class have the same characters, this may be...
Back
Top