9
$\begingroup$

This is the following definition of a category that I'm using

enter image description here

Now correct me if I'm wrong but nothing explicitly in the definition of a category above states that for any two objects $X$, $Y \in \text{Obj}(C)$ there must exist a morphism $f \in \text{Hom}_C(X, Y)$ correct?

But under the text describing composition, there most exist a morphism $f \in \text{Hom}_C(X, Y)$ for any two objects $X$, $Y \in \text{Obj}(C)$, because we need that morphism for composition. So there can't be any empty $\text{Hom}_C(X, Y)$ classes correct?

My assertion in the above paragraph would then trivially prove the following.

Let $C$ be a category and suppose $f \in \text{Hom}_C(X, Y)$ for some objects $X, Y \in \text{Obj}(C)$, then there exists a morphism $g \in \text{Hom}_C(Y, X)$

Has everything I said above been correct?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Where does it say that there must exist such a morphism? The only existence axiom yields the identity morphism. $\endgroup$ – Paul K Feb 3 '18 at 14:35
  • $\begingroup$ Indeed, any discrete category contains no arrows between any two different objects. $\endgroup$ – Patrick Stevens Feb 3 '18 at 14:43
19
$\begingroup$

Yes, it may happen that $\operatorname{Hom}_C(X,Y)$ is the empty class.

No, that does not invalidate the part about composition. If $\operatorname{Hom}_C(X,Y)=\emptyset$, then it is vacuously true that for every $f\in \operatorname{Hom}_C(X,Y)$ and $g\in \operatorname{Hom}_C(Y,Z)$, we have a composite morphism $g\circ f$.


An example is the category of fields and field homomorphisms: If two fields have different characteristic, there is no morphism between them.

$\endgroup$
8
$\begingroup$

The axioms just state that there is a mapping

$$ Hom(X,Y) \times Hom(Y,Z) \to Hom(X,Z) $$

but this does not imply that $Hom(X,Y),Hom(Y,Z)$ and $Hom(X,Z)$ are non empty.

Indeed, if any of $Hom(X,Y),Hom(Y,Z)$ are empty, then the domain of the wanted mapping is empty, so we can take the mapping to be the empty set. Indeed, the empty set is a mapping $\emptyset \to A$ for any class $A$. (It is also unique, since no other such mappings exist.)

For a simple counterexample, take the $\bf Set$ category made of sets and functions, and observe that $Hom(\{42\},\emptyset)$ is empty, otherwise we could take a morphism/function $f:\{42\}\to\emptyset$ and have $f(42)\in\emptyset$.

Discrete (poset) categories also provide counterexamples. Take $\{0,1\}$ as objects, and only the two identity morphisms $id_0,id_1$. This makes a category, even if $Hom(0,1)=Hom(1,0)=\emptyset$.

At most, the composition axiom implies that, if $Hom(X,Y),Hom(Y,Z)$ are both non empty, then $Hom(X,Z)$ is also non empty. This is because we can take two morphisms $f\in Hom(X,Y),g \in Hom(Y,Z)$ and compose them as $g\circ f \in Hom(X,Z)$.

$Hom(W,W)$ is always nonempty because of the identity morphism.

$\endgroup$

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.