Why do we say morphisms preserve the structure/operations?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Tosh5457
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of "structure" in mathematics, particularly in the context of category theory and morphisms. Participants explore what constitutes a mathematical structure, how morphisms relate to these structures, and the implications of saying that morphisms preserve operations and properties within various mathematical frameworks.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the precise definition of "structure" and whether a ring qualifies as a structure, suggesting that the term may lack a strict mathematical definition in this context.
  • One participant proposes that morphisms can be viewed as renamings, implying that if names change, the underlying statements should remain valid.
  • Another participant defines structure as mathematical properties, such as being an abelian group or a smooth manifold, and explains that structure is preserved by a map if certain conditions hold, like F(a + b) = F(a) + F(b).
  • There is a distinction made between morphisms and isomorphisms, with the assertion that not all morphisms have structure-preserving inverses, illustrated by the example of a morphism mapping an abelian group to the trivial group.
  • Examples from different mathematical areas are provided, such as Euclidean geometry, topology, and algebra, to illustrate how morphisms function and preserve properties in those contexts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the definition and implications of "structure" and the nature of morphisms. There is no consensus on a precise definition of structure, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the metaphorical versus technical interpretations of morphisms in category theory.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the ambiguity surrounding the definition of "structure" and the varying interpretations of morphisms across different mathematical contexts. The discussion does not resolve these ambiguities.

Tosh5457
Messages
130
Reaction score
28
What is exactly is a structure? Is a ring a structure?
And what does that mean exactly, that morphisms preserve the structure and operations?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Tosh5457 said:
What is exactly is a structure? Is a ring a structure?
And what does that mean exactly, that morphisms preserve the structure and operations?

I think you are asking about a metphorical description of category theory - i.e. a poetic description of moprhisms in non technical language. So "structure" may not have an exact mathematical definition in that context.

As to whether a ring "is a structure" or "has structure", I don't think "structure" has a precise definition in that context either. (There is the further question of whether "a ring" means a specific ring or whether it only means the abstraction defined by the axioms of a ring.)

A page with interesting links about category theory is http://www.j-paine.org/make_category_theory_intuitive.html. However, I can't say any of those links have turned on a light bulb for me yet. Perhaps you can explain some of them to me!
 
A morphism is like a renaming. Morphisms preserve the structure means if we go though and change all the names the statements should remain true.
 
To me srtucture is any mathematical property such as being an abelian group or a smooth manifold. Structure is preserved by a map if F(structure) = structure(F) by which is meant things like

F(a + b) = f(a) + f(b) or is f is a smooth map then so is foF.

A morphism may not be an isomorphism i.e. may not have a structure preserving inverse so I would not think of it as a renaming, For instance the morphism that maps an abelian group to the trivial group is not a renaming.

One can formalize the idea of a morphism by defining an abstract category which has objects and morphisms between them. One has the category whose objects are abelian groups and whose morphisms are group homomorphisms or the category of smooth manifolds and smooth maps or the category of commutative rings and ring homomorphisms.
 
Last edited:
structure = salient properties of object under study in the context of the subject at hand. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_structure

morphism is a word from category theory which is a framework for what you are asking.

simple examples:

Euclidean geometry: Two figures are equivalent if you can map one onto the other via a similarity. In the context of Euclidean geometry it does not matter what scale my drawings are or their exact location or orientation in space.

Topology: Morphisms are continuous maps. i.e. maps that preserve "closeness" in a certain sense.

Algebra: Morphisms preserve the operations. e.g. T(ax+by)=aTx+bTy for linear transformations.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 52 ·
2
Replies
52
Views
14K