0

The following question is taken from Arrows, Structures and Functors the categorical imperative by Arbib and Manes.

$\color{Green}{Background:}$

$\textbf{(1) Proposition:}$ In the category $\textbf{Vect}$

$\textbf{(i)}$ $f$ is an epimorphism iff $f$ is onto iff $f$ is a coequalizer.

$\textbf{(2)}$ $\textbf{Proposition:}$ Every coequalizer is an epimorphism.

Proof: If $h=\text{coeq}(p_1,p_2)$ and $k_1\circ h=k_2\circ h,$ then $$(k_1\circ k_2)\circ p_1=k_1\circ(h\circ p_2)=k_1\circ(h\circ p_2)=(k_1\circ h)\circ p_2$$ and so there is a unique morphism $\psi$ such that $k_1\circ h=\psi\circ h.$ Thus $k_1=\psi=k_2.$

$\textbf{(3)}$ $\textit{A coequalizer is an epimorphism.}$

Proof: If $f:A\to B$ $\textit{is an epimorphism, f is onto.}$ Let $E$ be the equivalence relation $\{(b,b')\mid b-b'\in f(A)\}$ on $B.$ Following a standard if sloppy convention, we write the quotient set as $B/f(A)$ rather than $B/E. B/E$ is easily checked to be a vector space with operations $[b]+[b']=[b+b'], \lambda\cdot[b]=[\lambda\cdot b].$

Define the two linear maps $$t:B\to B/f(A):b\mapsto [b]$$ $$u:B\to B/f(A):b\to [0].$$ Then $t\circ f$ and $u\circ f$ are both zero maps (since $[f(a)]=[0]$ for all $a$ in $A$) and so $t=u$ because $f$ is an epimorphism. Thus for all $b\in B, [b]=[0],b\in f(A),$ and $f$ is onto.

$\color{Red}{Questions:}$

I don't understand why in the proof, why both $[f(a)]=[0]$ and $[b]=[0].$ Is it that $[f(a)]=[0]$ is an assumed fact, if so, how and why? Hence $(b,b')\in E$ or $bEb'.$ Thank you in advance

Seth
  • 4,043

1 Answers1

1

Is it because of the following, if we let $b'=f(a)=0$ and $b=0,$ then $b-b'\in f(A),$ Hence $(b,b')\in E$ or $bEb'.$ Thank you in advance

No. You can't "let" $f(a)=0$ for a generic $a$ unless you know $f$ is the zero map. To show $[f(a)]=[0]$ in $B/f(A)$ (which, by the way, is not sloppy notation and is entirely unambiguous : )) - well, this should be easy. If not, I recommend you review how to work with quotient (vector) spaces. $[f(a)]=[0]$ by definition if and only if $f(a)-0\in f(A)$. So, that's if and only if $f(a)\in f(A)$, which is true. Therefore, $[f(a)]=[0]$.

After concluding that $t=u$, we know $[b]=0$ because $[b]=t(b)=u(b)=[0]$. That's if and only if $b-0\in f(A)$, i.e. $b\in f(A)$. And this is true for all $b$, so, it must be that $f$ is surjective (onto). So you conclude epimorphisms are onto.

FShrike
  • 46,840
  • 3
  • 35
  • 94
  • 1
    oh oh thank you for explaining that. By the way, in the post where it was confusing. I figured it out. Actually, a friend explained it to me. The definitions in that post, there are only two sources for it, and the ones cited are it. I still have to fixed some posts you commented earlier. I will do it in the next few days. I hope you are having a good summer. Also, come to Canada sometime. :) – Seth Jul 05 '23 at 15:51
  • @Seth I would very much like to. Have a good summer likewise – FShrike Jul 05 '23 at 16:12
  • actually, in the proof, is it assumed that $[f(a)]=[0]$ or does that need to be shown. If it is assumed, what allows the author to assume that? I edited the post accordingly. – Seth Jul 05 '23 at 17:08
  • @Seth It needs to be shown but it is always true. I showed it in my post that $[b]=[0]$ iff. $b=f(a)$ for some $a$ – FShrike Jul 05 '23 at 17:51
  • okay okay. Oh can I ask you about this post. I cannot try to find a proper counterexample. Thanks. – Seth Jul 05 '23 at 17:54