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.

In an Abelian category $\mathcal{A}$, let {$A_i$} be a family of subobjects of an object $A$. How to show that if $\mathcal{A}$ is cocomplete(i.e. the coproduct always exists in $\mathcal{A}$), then there is a smallest subobject $\sum{A_i}$ of $A$ containing all of $A_i$?

Surely this $\sum{A_i}$ cannot be the coproduct of {$A_i$}, but I have no clue what it should be.

share|improve this question
    
push out of pull back of $A_i \to A$ –  Alexander Thumm Aug 20 '11 at 9:31
    
@Alexander: That only works for a pair of subobjects. If you have three subobjects, the pullback may be trivial even when there are non-trivial pairwise intersections. –  Zhen Lin Aug 20 '11 at 10:01
    
@Zhen: for three objects $A_1 + A_2 + A_3 = (A_1 + A_2) + A_3$ obviously –  Alexander Thumm Aug 20 '11 at 10:38
    
You seem to have found the right generalization though. –  Alexander Thumm Aug 20 '11 at 10:47

1 Answer 1

up vote 4 down vote accepted

You are quite right that it can't be the coproduct, since that is in general not a subobject of $A$. Here are two ways of constructing the desired subobject:

  1. As Pierre-Yves suggested in the comments, the easiest way is to take the image of the canonical map $\bigoplus_i A_i \to A$. This works in any cocomplete category with unique epi-mono factorisation.

  2. Alternatively, the subobject $\sum A_i$ can be constructed by taking the colimit over the semilattice of the $A_i$ and their intersections. This construction can be carried out in any bicomplete category, but is not guaranteed to give a subobject of $A$ unless the category is nice enough.

share|improve this answer
1  
Dear Zhen Li: I'll tell you what I'd have answered, and you (or someone else) will tell me why it's incorrect, if you're patient enough. The coproduct maps naturally to $A$, with some kernel. Thus, the quotient of the coproduct by the kernel can be viewed as a subobject. –  Pierre-Yves Gaillard Aug 20 '11 at 9:45
1  
@Pierre-Yves: That works too. Or we can just directly ask for the image, since every morphism in an abelian category has a unique epi-mono factorisation. –  Zhen Lin Aug 20 '11 at 9:45
    
Dear Zhen Lin, thank you very much! –  Pierre-Yves Gaillard Aug 20 '11 at 9:47
    
+1. Nice answer! [Thanks for the edit! Sorry I had forgotten to upvote, and now it looks like I did it because you were kind enough to put my name. I hope people will think I'm self-centered, but not to that extent... ;)] –  Pierre-Yves Gaillard Aug 20 '11 at 10:11
    
@Zhen Lin Thank you very much! –  Li Zhan Aug 20 '11 at 10:28

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.