Help w/ Proof in Category Theory

mathsss2
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
I don't understand this proof, specifically the part in red, I don't understand. Please help me understand this step in the proof. Thanks!

Let Tors be the category whose objects are torsion abelian
groups; if A and B are torsion abelian groups, we define \text{Mor}_{\text{\textbf{Tors}}}(A, B) to
be the set of all (group) homomorphisms \phi : A \rightarrow B. Prove that direct
products exist in Tors; that is, show that given any indexed family {A_i}_{i \in I}
where each A_i is a torsion abelian group, there exists a torsion abelian group
which serves as a direct product for this family in Tors.


Proof- Let T be the torsion subgroup (that is, the subgroup of elements of finite
order) of P = \prod_{i \in I} A_i = \{f : I \rightarrow A_i : f(i) \in A_i \text{ } \forall i\}; here of course
P is the direct product of \{A_i\}_{i \in I} in the category Ab. Let j : T \rightarrow P be
the inclusion and for each i \in I, let \pi_i : P \rightarrow A_i denote the usual projection
map; that is, \pi_i(f) = f(i). (In coordinate notation, \pi_i(a_0, a_1, \ldots) = a_i.)
For each i \in I define \tau_i : T \rightarrow A_i by \tau_i = \pi_i * j. I claim that the group
T together with the maps \{\tau_i\}_{i \in I} constitute a direct product for A_{i \in I} in
Tors. Well, given a torsion group S and maps \sigma_i : S \rightarrow A_i for each i \in I,
one defines h : S \rightarrow T as follows: given s \in S, let h(s) \in T be the function
defined by \color{red}{[h(s)](i) = \sigma_i(s)}. Then clearly \tau_i * h = \sigma_i \text{ } \forall i \in I. Moreover,
if h' : S \rightarrow T is any other map such that \tau_i * h' = \sigma_i, then for any s \in S and
i \in I, \color{red}{[h(s)](i) }= (\tau_i * h)(s) = \sigma_i(s) = (\tau_i * h')(s) = \color{red}{[h'(s)](i)}, so h = h'.


I don't understand what \color{red}{[h(s)](i) = \sigma_i(s)} is.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Function-valued functions can be confusing; I've always found that stepping through the notation in painstaking detail is very helpful.

By definition, h : S --> T
Therefore, h(s) \in T
By definition of T, h(s) is a function I \to A_i
h(s)(i) is, therefore, evaluating h(s) at i. (And h(s)(i) \in A_i)
 
Hurkyl said:
Function-valued functions can be confusing; I've always found that stepping through the notation in painstaking detail is very helpful.

By definition, h : S --> T
Therefore, h(s) \in T
By definition of T, h(s) is a function I \to A_i
h(s)(i) is, therefore, evaluating h(s) at i. (And h(s)(i) \in A_i)

Got it, thanks.
 
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
##\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...
Back
Top