From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.science.mathematics.categories/5157 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rory Lucyshyn-Wright Newsgroups: gmane.science.mathematics.categories Subject: Re: question Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 10:54:00 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Reply-To: Rory Lucyshyn-Wright NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1253552913 23637 80.91.229.12 (21 Sep 2009 17:08:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 17:08:33 +0000 (UTC) To: jim stasheff , Original-X-From: categories@mta.ca Mon Sep 21 19:08:24 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gsmc-categories@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mailserv.mta.ca ([138.73.1.1]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MpmLf-0000hV-0w for gsmc-categories@m.gmane.org; Mon, 21 Sep 2009 19:06:47 +0200 Original-Received: from Majordom by mailserv.mta.ca with local (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1Mplx8-000486-Ed for categories-list@mta.ca; Mon, 21 Sep 2009 13:41:26 -0300 Original-Sender: categories@mta.ca Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.science.mathematics.categories:5157 Archived-At: Theorem 1 of IV.4 in Mac Lane's _Categories_for_the_Working_Mathematician_ shows in particular that for a functor S:A-->C, the following are equivalent: (i) S is an equivalence of categories, (iii) S is full and faithful, and each object c \in C is isomorphic to Sa for some object a \in A. The proof of the implication (iii)->(i) appears to depend, in general, upon an analogue of the axiom of choice which is applied with respect to functions between classes. We say that S is essentially surjective on objects (e.s.o) if each object c \in C is isomorphic to Sa for some object a \in A. Thus, any full subcategory inclusion which is essentially surjective on objects is an equivalence of categories, and, in particular, such an inclusion is not only an equivalence but is also injective on objects. If a full subcategory inclusion A --> C is e.s.o. and, moreover, each isomorphism class of A is a singleton, then we say that A is a skeleton of C. Cheers, Rory Lucyshyn-Wright P.s. Perhaps someone on the list could provide a history of the different formulations of equivalence of categories and the associated terminology, with appropriate references. On Sun, 20 Sep 2009, jim stasheff wrote: > What do you call it when you have one (small) category being a (full) > subcategory of another , and every object in the big category is > isomorphic to one in the small category ? This is the case for the > category given by objects hom(S,A) ,and morphisms given by the equivalence > relation hom(T,A) ,as a subcategory of stack(A) . Is there an > equivalence of categories ? > > jim > [For admin and other information see: http://www.mta.ca/~cat-dist/ ]