4
$\begingroup$

Lemma 1.2.4 on page 39 of Neeman's book Triangulated Categories states:

Suppose we are given a candidate triangle $$X\rightarrow A\oplus Y\stackrel{\left(\begin{array}{cc}1&\alpha\\ \beta&\gamma \end{array}\right)}{\longrightarrow}A\oplus Z\rightarrow\Sigma X\ \ (*).$$ Then this candidate triangle is isomorphic to a direct sum of candidate triangles $$0\rightarrow A\rightarrow A\rightarrow0\ \ \ (**)$$ $$X\rightarrow Y\rightarrow Z\rightarrow\Sigma X\ \ (***).$$

The proof given in the book is by showing that there are maps of candidate triangles $(**)\rightarrow(*)\rightarrow(**)$ that compose to the identity map of candidate triangle $(**)$, and that candidate triangle $(***)$ can be obtained as kernel of the map $(*)\rightarrow(**)$, hence it is a direct summand.

Questions. Why is this proof valid? In particular: (1) is it true that if morphisms $T\rightarrow W\rightarrow T$ in an additive category compose to identity morphism of $T$, then $T$ is a direct summand of $W$? (2) Is it true that in an additive category if the kernel of a morphism $W\rightarrow T$ exists and $T$ is a direct summand of $W$, then $W\cong\operatorname{ker}\oplus T$? (3) Why not use a more direct proof as follows: one can show that $(**)$ is even a distinguished triangle. Also show that $(***)$ is a candidate triangle. Then the identity map between candidate triangle $(*)$ and direct sum of $(**)$ and $(***)$ is an isomorphism and we are done. Is there a problem with this proof?

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

(1) It's not true in general, but it is here, because of ...

(2) Yes, if by "$T$ is a direct summand of $W$", you mean that the morphism $W\to T$ is projection onto a direct summand.

More precisely, if $\varphi:W\to T$ is a morphism with a kernel, and there is another morphism $\psi:T\to W$ such that $\varphi\circ\psi=\mbox{id}_T$, then the natural map $\ker(\varphi)\to W$ and $\psi$ induce an isomorphism $\ker(\varphi)\oplus T\cong W$.

(3) The middle square won't commute if you take the identity maps (unless $\alpha=0=\beta$), so you won't get a map of triangles.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you for your response. $\endgroup$ – Must Feb 5 '14 at 2:19

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.