Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I've recently started learning Category theory- and I have a pondering- wondering if anyone can help.

Is it possible for two categories to satisfy two different set-axiom system. Namely- is it possible for two distinct categories $SetZFC$ and $SetZF\neg C$ to exists? One satisfying AC and the other negating it?

And finally, and more generally- Are categories subjected to any a-priory set of set-axioms? or are those axioms given as information in a given category?

Thanks

share|improve this question

3 Answers 3

up vote 3 down vote accepted

The question seems to me can you describe the difference in the language of categories? In $Set(ZFC)$ every epimorphism splits, in $Set(ZF\neg C)$ not.

share|improve this answer
1  
I think your second is supposed to be $Set(ZF\neg C)$... –  Arturo Magidin Mar 23 '11 at 22:38
    
Thanks, indeed. –  scineram Mar 24 '11 at 12:00

Yes, this is modelable in topos theory. The axiom of choice for toposes says that the any infinite product of non-initial objects is non-initial (one way to state it) or that every epi splits (as noted above). Look up Bill Lawvere's ETCS, which has a choicified version and an non-choicified version.

share|improve this answer

Yes, this is certainly possible.

Take $\mathrm{ZF}+\mathrm{AD}$ as foundation, where $\mathrm{AD}$ is the axiom of determinacy. Then we can refute the axiom of choice. Now let $\mathbf{Set}$ denote the category of all sets, with functions as morphisms. Then $\mathbf{Set}$ satisfies: "Some epimorphisms fail to split."

We can also define $L$, Goedel's constructible universe, and this satisfies $\mathrm{ZFC}$ (in fact, it satisfies $\mathrm{ZF}+(V=L).$ See also, axiom of constructibility). So write $\mathbf{Set}^L$ for the category of all constructible sets with constructible functions as morphisms. Then $\mathbf{Set}^L$ satisfies the statement "all epimorphisms split."

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.