1 / 18

Abstract

Abstract.

ziya
Download Presentation

Abstract

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Abstract Some of the so called smallness conditions in algebra as well as in Category Theory, important and interesting for their own and also tightly related to injectivity, Essential Bounded , Cogenerating set, and Residual Smallness. Here we want to see the relationships between these notions and to study these notions in the class mod(∑ ,E). That is all of objects in the Grothendick Topos E which satisfy ∑, ∑ is a class of equations. Introduction In the whole of this talk A is an arbitrary category and M is an arbitrary subclass of its morphisms. Def. Let A be an arbitrary category andM be an arbitrary subclass of it’s morphisms, also A and B are two objects inA. We say that A is anM- subobject of B provided that there exists an M- morphism m:AB.

  2. In this case we say that (A,m) is anM- subobject of B, or (m,B) is an M-extension for A. The class of all M- subobjects of an object X is denoted by M/X, and the class ofall M-extensions of Xis denoted byX/M. We like the class of M-subobjects M/Xto behaveproper. This holds, if M has good properties. Def.One says that Mhas“good properties” with respect to composition if it is: (1) Isomorphism closed; that is, contains all isomorphism and is closed under composition with isomorphism. (2) Left regular; that is, for f in M with fg=f we have g is an isomorphism. (3)Composition closed; that is, for f:AB and g:BC in M, gf is also in M. (4) Left cancellable; that is, gf is inM, implies fis in M. (5)Right cancellable; that is, gf is in M, implies g is in M. We can define a binary relation ≤ onM/X as follows:

  3. If (A,m) and (B,n) are two M- subobjets of X, we say that (A,m)≤(B,n) whenever there exists a morphism f:AB such that nf=m. That is m A X f n B One can easily see that ≤ is a reflective and transitive relation, but it isn’t antisymmetric. But if M is left regular, ≤ is antisymmetric, too up to isomorphism. Similarly, one defines a relation ≤ on X/M as follows: If (m,A) and (n,B) belong to X/M, we say (m,A)≤(n,B) whenever, there exists a morphism f:A B such that fm = n. That is: m X A f n B Also it is easily seen that (X/M , ≤) forms a partially ordered class up to the relation ∼. Where (m,A)∼ (n,B) iff (m,A)≤ (n,B) and (n,B)≤ (m,A) . So from now on, we consider (X/M ,≤ ) up to ∼.

  4. Def. In Universal Algebra we say that A is subdirectly irreducible if for any morphism f:A ∏i in I Aiwith allPi fepimorphisms, there exists an index i0 in I for which pi0 f is an isomorphism. The following definition generalizes the above definition and it is seen that these are equivalent for equational categories of algebras. Def. An object S in a category is called M-subdirectly irreducible if there are an object X with two deferent morphisms f,g:X S s.t. any morphism h with domain S and hf≠hg,belongs toM. See the following: f h X  S B s.t.hf ≠ hg ⇒ h∈M g Also when the class of M-subdirectly irreducible objects in a category A forms just only a set we say that A is M-residually small Def.An M-chain is a family of X/M say {(mi,B i)}i in Iwhich is indexed by a totally ordered set I such that if i ≤jin I then there exists aij:Bi Bj with aij mi i =mj. Also we have aii= id Bi and for i ≤j ≤k, a ik=ajk aij.

  5. Def.An M- well ordered chain is an M- chain which is indexed by a totally well ordered set I. m0 X B0 m1 f01 m2 B1 f12 mn B2 mn+1 Bn fn n+1 Bn+1

  6. Essential Boundedness and Residul Smallness Def.A is said to be M-essentially bounded if for every object A∈Athere isaset{mi:AB i:i∈I } ⊆ Ms.t. for anyM-essential extensionn:ABthere exists i0∈I and h:BBi0 with mi0=hn. Def. An M-morphism f:AB is called an M-essential extension of A if anymorphism g:BC is in M whenever g f belongs to M. the class of all M- essential extension (of A) is denoted by M* (M*A). Note. A category A is called M-cowell powered whenever for any object A in A the class ofall M-extensions of A forms a set. The.M*-cowell poweredness implies M-essential boundedness. Conversely, if M=Mono, A is M-well powered and M-essentially bounded, then A is M*-cowell powered.

  7. The. If A has enough M- injectives then A is M- essentially bounded. The. Let M=Mono and E be another class of morphisms of A s.t. A has (E,M)-factorization diagonalization. Also, let A be E-cowell powered and have a generating set G s.t. for all G∈G, G பG ∈A. Then, M*-cowell poweredness implies M-residual smallness. Coro. Under the hypothesis of the former theorems, we can see that residual smallness is a necessary condition to having enough M- injectives when M=Mono.

  8. Def.A hasM-transferability property if for every pair f, u of morphisms with M-morphism f one has a commutative square f f A B A B u u v ⇒ C C D g with M-morphism g. Lem. If A has enough M- injectives then, A fulfills M- transferability property. Def.We say that A has M-bounds if for any small family {hi:ABi : i∈ I }≤M there exists an M-morphism h:AB which factors over all hi,s. The. Let A satisfy the M-transferability and M-chain condition, and let M be closed under composition. Then, A has M-bounds.

  9. Cogenerating set and Residual Smallness Def. A set C of objects of a category is a cogenerating set if for every parallel different morphisms m,n:xY there exist C∈C and a morphism f:YC s.t. fm≠fn. m f XY C n The. Let A have a cogenerating set C and A be M-well powered. Then A is M-residually small. Prop. For any equationalclass A , the following conditions are equivalent: (i) Injectivity is well behaved. (ii) A has enough injectives. (iii) Every subdirectly irreducible algebra in A has an injective extension. (iv) A satisfies M-transferability and M*- cowell poweredness.

  10. The. Let M=Mono and A be well powered with products and a generating set G. Then, having an M-cogenerating set implies M*-cowell poweredness. Corollary. Let M=Mono and A be well powered and have products and (E,M)-factorization diagonalization for a class E of morphisms for which A is E-well powered. Then T. F. S. A. E. ( i) A is M-essentially bounded. ( ii) A is M*-cowell powered. (iii) A is M-residually small. (iv) A has a cogenerating set.

  11. Injectivity of Algebras in a Grothendieck Topos Now we are going to see and investigate these notions and theorems in mod(∑,E). To do this we compare the two categories mod (∑,E) and mod(∑). Def. Note.

  12. Def. Note. Def. Coro.

  13. Prop. Lem. Res. Coro. Coro. The.

  14. Lem. Prop. The. Prop.

  15. The. The.

More Related