Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Can cycles – and/or other "interesting" families of graphs like paths, trees, hypercubes, etc. – be characterized by a universal property in the category of graphs?

I admit that there is not a single one category of graphs – it depends on what a graph and what graph homomorphisms are supposed to be. So the question should be:

Are there categories of graphs in which cycles (paths, trees, hypercubes, etc.) can be characterized by a universal property?

Added: I just found out, that I asked a very similar question some months ago: What is special about simplices, circles, paths and cubes?. Sorry for the duplicate.

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 1 down vote accepted

Strictly speaking, every object in every category has a universal property: an object $c \in C$ is always the universal object equipped with a map to $c$. Equivalently, universal properties usually cash out to describing the functor an object represents, and every object always represents the functor $\text{Hom}(c, -)$. In practice, often what we mean by an object having a universal property is that $\text{Hom}(c, -)$ admits some other description.

So $n$-cycles, in particular, are universal $n$-cycles: they represent the functor sending a graph to its set of $n$-cycles, where the precise definition of $n$-cycle depends on the choice of morphisms in the category of graphs.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


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.