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.
   • CommentAuthorPieter
   • CommentTimeFeb 2nd 2019
   • PermaLink
   Author: Pieter
   Format: MarkdownItexI've noticed that the page on [[projection]] does not mention the more generic definition of projection used on wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projection_(mathematics) Is there a particular reason for this?

   I’ve noticed that the page on projection does not mention the more generic definition of projection used on wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projection_(mathematics)

   Is there a particular reason for this?

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
   • CommentTimeFeb 3rd 2019
   • PermaLink
   Author: Mike Shulman
   Format: MarkdownItexIt's mentioned in the "linear algebra" section, in the case of vector spaces. I've never heard that terminology used outside of linear algebra, and since the nLab is mainly about category theory the categorical meaning is more relevant. However, we could certainly mention the other meaning.

   It’s mentioned in the “linear algebra” section, in the case of vector spaces. I’ve never heard that terminology used outside of linear algebra, and since the nLab is mainly about category theory the categorical meaning is more relevant. However, we could certainly mention the other meaning.

3. • CommentRowNumber3.
   • CommentAuthorPieter
   • CommentTimeFeb 3rd 2019
   • PermaLink
   Author: Pieter
   Format: MarkdownItexHm... I don't recognize what I mean in the linear algebra section. On wikipedia it says that a map $f : X \rightarrow Y$ is a projection if for any $Z$ and map $g : Z \rightarrow Y$ there exists a map $h : Z \rightarrow X$ such that $f h = g$. That sounds like a categorical definition to me, and seems to have some meaning on its own. Does it go by different names as well, perhaps?

   Hm… I don’t recognize what I mean in the linear algebra section.

   On wikipedia it says that a map $f : X \rightarrow Y$ is a projection if for any $Z$ and map $g : Z \rightarrow Y$ there exists a map $h : Z \rightarrow X$ such that $f h = g$.

   That sounds like a categorical definition to me, and seems to have some meaning on its own. Does it go by different names as well, perhaps?

4. • CommentRowNumber4.
   • CommentAuthorTim_Porter
   • CommentTimeFeb 3rd 2019
   • PermaLink
   Author: Tim_Porter
   Format: MarkdownItexThat looks like a split epimorphism by taking $Z=Y$ and $g=id_Y$.

   That looks like a split epimorphism by taking $Z=Y$ and $g=id_Y$.

5. • CommentRowNumber5.
   • CommentAuthorTim_Porter
   • CommentTimeFeb 3rd 2019
   • (edited Feb 3rd 2019)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Tim_Porter
   Format: MarkdownItex(Duplicate)

   (Duplicate)

6. • CommentRowNumber6.
   • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
   • CommentTimeFeb 3rd 2019
   • PermaLink
   Author: Mike Shulman
   Format: MarkdownItexI was looking at the first line of <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projection_(mathematics)> > In mathematics, a projection is a mapping of a set (or other mathematical structure) into a subset (or sub-structure), which is equal to its square for mapping composition (or, in other words, which is idempotent) I don't see the definition you mention in #3.

   I was looking at the first line of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projection_(mathematics)

   In mathematics, a projection is a mapping of a set (or other mathematical structure) into a subset (or sub-structure), which is equal to its square for mapping composition (or, in other words, which is idempotent)

   I don’t see the definition you mention in #3.

7. • CommentRowNumber7.
   • CommentAuthorPieter
   • CommentTimeFeb 3rd 2019
   • PermaLink
   Author: Pieter
   Format: MarkdownItexI was looking at the commutativity diagram a bit lower... but I now realize that the definition next to it is a bit more extensive than just this universal property. There seems to be a relation with the notion of retract.

   I was looking at the commutativity diagram a bit lower… but I now realize that the definition next to it is a bit more extensive than just this universal property.

   There seems to be a relation with the notion of retract.

8. • CommentRowNumber8.
   • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
   • CommentTimeFeb 3rd 2019
   • PermaLink
   Author: Mike Shulman
   Format: MarkdownItexRight, a splitting of an idempotent is an split epimorphism, i.e. a retraction, and any split epimorphism is a splitting of the idempotent induced on its domain.

   Right, a splitting of an idempotent is an split epimorphism, i.e. a retraction, and any split epimorphism is a splitting of the idempotent induced on its domain.