Not signed in

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

• Username
• Password
• Remember me

• Sign in using OpenID
• Remember me

• Forgot your password?
• Apply for membership

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

1. • CommentRowNumber1.
   • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
   • CommentTimeAug 19th 2013
   • PermaLink
   Author: TobyBartels
   Format: MarkdownItexAt [[partition]], I\'ve defined partitions of sets, numbers, intervals, measure spaces, and unity on topological spaes, giving these all as special cases of a general concept defined in a monoid whose nonzero elements form an ideal (and possibly equipped with some notion of infinite sum).

   At partition, I've defined partitions of sets, numbers, intervals, measure spaces, and unity on topological spaes, giving these all as special cases of a general concept defined in a monoid whose nonzero elements form an ideal (and possibly equipped with some notion of infinite sum).

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthorRodMcGuire
   • CommentTimeAug 19th 2013
   • (edited Aug 19th 2013)
   • PermaLink
   Author: RodMcGuire
   Format: MarkdownItexI've been going to write something up about this (have you noticed me poking around in the nLab :)?) The point I wanted to promote is that (at least for sets) a partition is the opposite of a function. For $f: A \to B$ a function, $f^{op}: B \to A$ is a partition, $image(f)$ indexes the equivalence classes, and $f^{op}\circ f: A \to P(A)$ maps an element of $A$ to its equivalence class induced by $f$. When partitions are involved, equivalence classes are often prominent though this doesn't seem to be the case for one of the most famous partition in categories and graphs where $hom_X$ is the opposite of the function $(source, dest): arrows(X) \to objects(X)^2$ More explicitly say a $0graph$ is a graph (quiver) enriched in $2$ (a most 1 arrow between objects) - I chose the name to make the underlying graph of a $0category$ a $0graph$. A relation between sets, $R: A \to B$ is a $0graph$ with objects partitioned into sets $A$ and $B$ such that $hom(A,B) = arrows(R)$, and a function is a special type of relation. An equivalence relation $E$ on $A$ is the underlying graph (a 0graph) of $E$ considered as a category and this correspondance holds for all relations that are reflexive and transitive. The terminology gets confusing - what is often called the graph of a function is actually the $hom$ of the function's $0graph$. I've been poking around trying to find the correct words to describe the above (which probably aren't right as given), and also trying to figure out how the notion of fiber is involved, what to call the opposite of a function (a "cofunction"?), and on what nlab pages this should be mentioned.

   I’ve been going to write something up about this (have you noticed me poking around in the nLab :)?)

   The point I wanted to promote is that (at least for sets) a partition is the opposite of a function. For $f: A \to B$ a function, $f^{op}: B \to A$ is a partition, $image(f)$ indexes the equivalence classes, and $f^{op}\circ f: A \to P(A)$ maps an element of $A$ to its equivalence class induced by $f$.

   When partitions are involved, equivalence classes are often prominent though this doesn’t seem to be the case for one of the most famous partition in categories and graphs where $hom_X$ is the opposite of the function $(source, dest): arrows(X) \to objects(X)^2$

   More explicitly say a $0graph$ is a graph (quiver) enriched in $2$ (a most 1 arrow between objects) - I chose the name to make the underlying graph of a $0category$ a $0graph$.

   A relation between sets, $R: A \to B$ is a $0graph$ with objects partitioned into sets $A$ and $B$ such that $hom(A,B) = arrows(R)$, and a function is a special type of relation.

   An equivalence relation $E$ on $A$ is the underlying graph (a 0graph) of $E$ considered as a category and this correspondance holds for all relations that are reflexive and transitive.

   The terminology gets confusing - what is often called the graph of a function is actually the $hom$ of the function’s $0graph$.

   I’ve been poking around trying to find the correct words to describe the above (which probably aren’t right as given), and also trying to figure out how the notion of fiber is involved, what to call the opposite of a function (a “cofunction”?), and on what nlab pages this should be mentioned.

3. • CommentRowNumber3.
   • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
   • CommentTimeAug 19th 2013
   • PermaLink
   Author: Mike Shulman
   Format: MarkdownItexPerhaps you want the word [cograph](http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/graph+of+a+function#cograph) or [collage](http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/cograph+of+a+profunctor)?

   Perhaps you want the word cograph or collage?

4. • CommentRowNumber4.
   • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
   • CommentTimeAug 21st 2013
   • (edited Aug 21st 2013)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Todd_Trimble
   Format: MarkdownItexRe #1: this is a nice page, Toby -- thanks! Re #2: the opposite $f^{op}$ of a function $f: A \to B$ (in this sense) would be (edited) a partition of $A$ with extra "[stuff](http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/stuff,+structure,+property)" (corresponding to elements in $B$ not in the image); a partition without extra stuff would be opposite to a surjective function. The corresponding equivalence relation would be the [[kernel pair]] of $f$.

   Re #1: this is a nice page, Toby – thanks!

   Re #2: the opposite $f^{op}$ of a function $f: A \to B$ (in this sense) would be (edited) a partition of $A$ with extra “stuff” (corresponding to elements in $B$ not in the image); a partition without extra stuff would be opposite to a surjective function. The corresponding equivalence relation would be the kernel pair of $f$.