Not signed in (Sign In)

Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

  • Sign in using OpenID

Site Tag Cloud

2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry book bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration foundation foundations functional-analysis functor gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry graph graphs gravity grothendieck group group-theory harmonic-analysis higher higher-algebra higher-category-theory higher-differential-geometry higher-geometry higher-lie-theory higher-topos-theory homological homological-algebra homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory internal-categories k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology nlab noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pages pasting philosophy physics pro-object probability probability-theory quantization quantum quantum-field quantum-field-theory quantum-mechanics quantum-physics quantum-theory question representation representation-theory riemannian-geometry scheme schemes set set-theory sheaf simplicial space spin-geometry stable-homotopy-theory stack string string-theory superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory tqft type type-theory universal variational-calculus

Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to nForum
If you want to take part in these discussions either sign in now (if you have an account), apply for one now (if you don't).

nLab > Latest Changes: equalizer

Bottom of Page

1 to 11 of 11

  1.  
    • CommentRowNumber1.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeNov 29th 2010

    added to equalizer statement and proof that a category has equalizers if it has pullbcks and products

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorNikolajK
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2016
    • (edited May 21st 2016)

    With reference to the last diagram, what is an example for a pullback S× f,gSS\times_{f,g}S that isn’t isomorphic to the equalizer? I think another way of asking this is asking for an example where do the two projections out of this pullback objects differ by more than an isomorphism.

    And if the category has a terminal object, are this pullback and the equalizer already isomorphic?

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2016

    Let f,gf,g both be the unique morphism 2→12\to 1 in SetSet. Then S× f,gSS\times_{f,g} S is 2×2=42\times 2 = 4, while the equalizer is 22.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorJohn Baez
    • CommentTimeApr 22nd 2019

    I changed the final theorem from

    If a category has products and equalizers, then it has limits.

    to

    If a category has equalizers and finite products, then it has finite limits.

    and I changed an earlier proposition from

    A category has equalizers if it has products and pullbacks.

    to

    A category has equalizers if it has binary products and pullbacks.

    diff, v14, current

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeApr 22nd 2019

    Why not kill two birds with one stone by putting “finite” in parentheses (in appropriate places) in proposition 3.2? The change of the first doesn’t seem entirely warranted to me.

  6. Added that every equaliser is a monomorphism.

    diff, v15, current

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeFeb 17th 2021

    Simplified the description of equalizers in terms of products and pullbacks.

    diff, v19, current

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorDmitri Pavlov
    • CommentTimeMar 27th 2021

    Added this:

    Equalizers were defined in the paper

    for any finite collection of parallel morphisms. The paper refers to them as left equalizers, whereas coequalizers are referred to as right equalizers.

    diff, v22, current

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeMar 27th 2021

    Excellent – thanks!

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeSep 4th 2021

    added pointer to:

    diff, v24, current

    • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthormaxsnew
    • CommentTimeOct 8th 2024

    a simple property of equalizers

    diff, v25, current

1 to 11 of 11

  1.