Not signed in (Sign In)

Start a new discussion

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 beauty bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality education elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration 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 k-theory lie 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 multicategories 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 science set set-theory sheaf simplicial space spin-geometry stable-homotopy-theory string string-theory subobject superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory 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).
    • CommentRowNumber1.
    • CommentAuthorPeter Heinig
    • CommentTimeJun 30th 2017

    Made a few additions to preimage. Added missing word; added a brief mention of the widely-known general reason for the good preservation-properties of this endofunctor.

    The mention of these properties had already been there in preimage, but a reason was still missing. My parenthetical remark should perhaps be expanded and harmonized with existing relevant material on the nLab ( f\forall_f and f\exists_f are already well-documented on some pages), but this requires more care than I can apply to it today. Intend to return to the remark before long.

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeJun 30th 2017

    I changed the wording. The phrases “existential quantifier” and “universal quantifier” are well-established and appropriate here. One could also call f\exists_f “direct image along ff”; I don’t know of a similar analogous phrase for f\forall_f.

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeJun 30th 2017

    Sometimes I think f\forall_f is called the “dual image”. Unfortunately “co-image” seems to be taken for the image with respect to the dual factorization system.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeJun 30th 2017

    BTW, Peter: it was good to add that reason. I have a feeling that mathematicians at large are not aware of or sensitive to that particular argument (which is constructively valid, e.g., it carries over to general toposes and other general environments). The basic insight of ff * f\exists_f \dashv f^\ast \dashv \forall_f is often credited to Lawvere.

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorPeter Heinig
    • CommentTimeJul 1st 2017

    I have a feeling that mathematicians at large are not aware of or sensitive to that particular argument

    Yes, and instead of

    widely-known general reason

    I should have written “widely, but by far not widely-enough-known”.

    Of course, the links already led to the marvellous nLab page

    interactions of images and pre-images with unions and intersections

    but personally, I think this can hardly be mentioned too often, and some “foreshadowing” in preimage is useful.

    Incidentally, I used “universal image” and “existential image” because Goldblatt uses them on p. 183 of

    R. Goldblatt: Varieties of complex algebras. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 44 (1989) 173–242

    a paper I was studying while working on a proof of non-elementarity of a certain class of graphs.

    (Not that therefore “universal image” and “existential image” should be used, just to add some context.)

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeJul 2nd 2017

    I added some more observations, bringing up for example toposes and also the fact that quantifiers may be viewed as enriched Kan extensions, as famously observed by Lawvere.

  1. I think there was a typo in the use of T as the set. The set should be the same set we introduced in the image of f, S

    Abhijeet Mulgund

    diff, v11, current

Add your comments
  • Please log in or leave your comment as a "guest post". If commenting as a "guest", please include your name in the message as a courtesy. Note: only certain categories allow guest posts.
  • To produce a hyperlink to an nLab entry, simply put double square brackets around its name, e.g. [[category]]. To use (La)TeX mathematics in your post, make sure Markdown+Itex is selected below and put your mathematics between dollar signs as usual. Only a subset of the usual TeX math commands are accepted: see here for a list.

  • (Help)