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 need to show the following conditions are equivalent for a category $ C $

(a) $ C $ has binary products, equalizers, and a terminal object;

(b) $ C $ has pullbacks and a terminal object;

(c) $ C $ has finite limits

I know that if a category has pullbacks and a terminal object then it has binary products. I also know that if a category has pullbacks then it has equalizers.

I know that a category has all finite limits iff it has finite products and equalizers. IE if it has pullbacks and a terminal object.

I need to show one implies the others, right?

here is what I have:

If $C$ has pullbacks and terminal object 1, then to show $C$ has binary products, consider the pullback of $A, B \in C$

$$ \begin{array}{ccc} A \times B & \pi _{2} \rightarrow & B\\ \pi_{1} \downarrow & & \downarrow t_B\\ A & t_A \rightarrow & T \end{array} $$

$ \pi _{1} , \pi _{2} $ is a product cone over $A$ and $B.$ This is because for $p_{1}: P \rightarrow A$ and $p_{2}: P \rightarrow B$ we have $t_{A} \circ p_{1} = t_{B} \circ p_{2}$ where $t$ is the terminal object

therefore we have unique $h: P \rightarrow A \times B$ with $\pi _{1} \circ h = p_{1} ; \pi_{2} \circ h = p_{2}$

I know having pullbacks means you have equalizers, I had to prove that in a previous question.

So I have shown that (b) implies (a).

All I need is to now show (a) implies (c) right?

any

share|improve this question
    
So witch implication you want us to show? –  user52045 Dec 3 '13 at 18:49
    
@user52045 I need to know how to show one implies the other. thanks :) sad to get a neg vote. –  sarah jamal Dec 5 '13 at 19:50
    
@StefanHamcke As far as I can see, the three statements are equivalent. Also, binary products and equalizers don't imply all limits, or even all finite limits, because they don't produce a terminal object (a limit of the empty diagram). For a counterexample, use the poset (considered as a category in the usual way) with three elements $a,b,c$ where $a<b$ and $a<c$ while $b$ and $c$ are incomparable. –  Andreas Blass Dec 7 '13 at 0:40
    
@AndreasBlass: Never mind, I notice that I misread the question. –  Stefan Hamcke Dec 7 '13 at 0:48

1 Answer 1

Given binary products, equalizers, and a terminal object, first use induction and binary products to show that you have products for any finite number $n\geq1$ of objects. You also have the product of $0$ objects, namely the terminal object, so you have all finite products. In particular, given a finite diagram, say with $V$ as its set of vertices (objects of your category), with $E$ as its set of edges (morphisms of your category), and with each edge $e$ having source $s(e)$ and target $t(e)$ in $V$, you can form the product $X$ of all the objects in $V$ and the product $Y$, indexed by $E$, of the factors $t(e)$. Consider the two morphisms $X\to Y$ defined as follows by giving their components at each edge $e$. The first has, as its $e$-component, the morphism $X\to t(e)$ that is simply the $t(e)$-th projection of the product $X$. The second has as its $e$-th component the composite of the $s(e)$-th projection of $X$ with the morphism $e:s(e)\to t(e)$. Let $L\to X$ be the equalizer of these two morphisms. Composing it with the projections $X\to v$ for all vertices $v$ of your diagram, you get morphisms $L\to v$ for all $v\in V$. It is straightforward to check that these morphisms constitute a limit cone for your diagram.

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.