From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.science.mathematics.categories/5821
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: "Prof. Peter Johnstone"
Newsgroups: gmane.science.mathematics.categories
Subject: Re: "injective" terminology
Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 10:27:06 +0100 (BST)
Message-ID:
References:
Reply-To: "Prof. Peter Johnstone"
NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1274315050 2938 80.91.229.12 (20 May 2010 00:24:10 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 00:24:10 +0000 (UTC)
To: Michael Barr
Original-X-From: categories@mta.ca Thu May 20 02:24:08 2010
connect(): No such file or directory
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 4.69)
(envelope-from )
id 1OEtYW-0008Tp-9q
for gsmc-categories@m.gmane.org; Thu, 20 May 2010 02:24:08 +0200
Original-Received: from Majordom by mailserv.mta.ca with local (Exim 4.61)
(envelope-from )
id 1OEt63-0006zq-KN
for categories-list@mta.ca; Wed, 19 May 2010 20:54:43 -0300
Original-Sender: categories@mta.ca
Precedence: bulk
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.science.mathematics.categories:5821
Archived-At:
Like Michael, I've occasionally been bothered by the conflict between
the two uses of "injective". However, for me it's the use of the word
as a dual for "projective" that feels wrong; the opposite of "pro" is
not "in" but "con" (or "contra"). Also, the use of "injective"
and "surjective" for maps is so well established throughout
mathematics that I don't think there is any chance of changing it.
I've thought of using "coprojective" for the dual of "projective";
but for anyone with a classical education that word means
"shit-throwing".
Peter Johnstone
----------------------
On Tue, 18 May 2010, Michael Barr wrote:
> Since there has been such a lively discussion of language (which I have
> kept out of because I have seen too many papers start out by saying, "By
> ring, we mean a commutative ring with unit"), I though I would bring up
> one that has long bothered me. There are too many contexts in which you
> have a concrete category (say of compact hausdorff spaces) in which you
> are dealing with both injective objects and 1-1 maps that I feel we need a
> better word for the latter than "injective". Of course, I could just
> revert to 1-1 and perhaps I will. But we have "projective" and
> "surjective" for the dual. This suggests "superjective", except that
> that is so ugly.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> Michael
>
> P.S. I originally used *-autonomous to mean symmetric and then I wrote a
> paper called, "Non-symmetric *-autonomous categories", so I am just as
> guilty.
>
[For admin and other information see: http://www.mta.ca/~cat-dist/ ]