0
$\begingroup$

$\renewcommand{\phi}{\varphi}$ $\require{AMScd}$ My question is different from this one.

I want to see how in a preadditive category $\mathcal{C}$ a product is a coproduct, following this proof. I'll write the proof up to the point where I get stuck.

Let $A=A_1,B=A_2$ be objects and suppose their product $P$ does exist, with projections $\pi_i:P\rightarrow A_i$. By considering a wedge

$$\begin{CD}A @<{id_A}<< A @>{0_{AB}}>> B\end{CD}$$

and the obvious analogous one with $A$ and $B$ exchanged, where $0_{A,B}$ is the zero morphism, we see that the product property implies the existence of two unique morphisms $k_i\in\mathcal{C}[A_i,P]$ s.t.

\begin{align*} \pi_j\circ k_i=\begin{cases} \mathrm{id}_i &\text{if }i=j\\ 0_{A_i, A_j} &\text{if }i\neq j \end{cases}. \end{align*} Using these equations and the definition of zero morphism, it's easy to see that the morphism $m\equiv k_1\circ \pi_1+ k_2\circ \pi_2$ satisfies $\pi_i\circ m=\pi_i$.

This is where I get stuck: In the linked proof, they now state that this implies $m=\mathrm{id}_P.$ But I don't see why this should be true.

Specifically, if $\phi\in\mathcal{C}[S,P]$ for some arbitrary object $S$, it is not apparent why $m\circ\phi=\phi$. All that we know is that there are some morphisms $x_i\in\mathcal{C}[S,A_i]$ that factor through $P$ via the universal property, but these are not necessarily unique.

And we learn even less about $m$ by looking at morphisms in $\mathcal{C}[P,S]$.

What am I missing here?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I don't really understand why you say that the morphisms $x_i$ are not necessarily unique. Universal properties always have a uniqueness requirement! $\endgroup$ – Arnaud D. Apr 20 '17 at 12:54
  • $\begingroup$ But aren't the projections $\pi_i$ only unique up to unique isomorphism? That for me would translate to "kinda unique", which is not really the same as unique? I guess I'm being stubborn $\endgroup$ – user435308 Apr 20 '17 at 13:09
  • $\begingroup$ Well, the limit is unique up to unique isomorphism; but if you considered a fixed object $P$ with fixed projections $\pi_i$, the universal property tells you that an arrow $\phi:S\to P$ is uniquely determined by $\pi_1\phi$ and $\pi_2\phi$. $\endgroup$ – Arnaud D. Apr 20 '17 at 13:16
0
$\begingroup$

The equality $m=id_P$ follows from the identities $\pi_i\circ m=\pi_i=\pi_i\circ id_P$, for $i=1,2$. The reason is that by the universal property of the product (and especially the uniqueness part), the projections $\pi_i$ must be jointly monic.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Ok, so this jointly monic part means that whenever $\pi_i\circ f =\pi_i \circ g$ for $i=1,2$, then we get wedges that are actually the same, but have mediators $f$ and $g$, respectively. But mediators are unique, so $f=g$. And thanks for noticing that I needed to see the word fixed :) $\endgroup$ – user435308 Apr 20 '17 at 13:30
  • $\begingroup$ I hope it's ok to add this question as a comment: We can now for some morphisms $a_i\in\mathcal{C}[A_i,W]$ (call $a_1=a, a_2=b)$ construct the arrow $l\equiv a\circ\pi_1+b\circ\pi_2$. Then $l\circ k_A=a+b\circ 0_{A,B}$, and similarly for $k_B$. The problem is then that $b\circ 0_{A,B}\neq 0_{A,W}$, so I don't see how this $l$ is the mediator for the coproduct (which is what the proof on the Stacks Project site implies) $\endgroup$ – user435308 Apr 20 '17 at 14:10
  • $\begingroup$ Nah, composition is bilinear, so anything composed with a zero will give zero. Then we get a bijective correspondence between $\mathcal{C}[P,W]$ and $\mathcal{C}[A,W]\times \mathcal{C}[B,W]$ by $(a,b) \mapsto a\circ\pi_1+b\circ\pi_2$ and $l \mapsto (l\circ k_A, l\circ k_B)$. $\endgroup$ – user435308 Apr 20 '17 at 14:27
  • $\begingroup$ I was about to tell you that :) $\endgroup$ – Arnaud D. Apr 20 '17 at 14:28

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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