From: "Olivia Caramello" <oc233@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
To: "'Eduardo J. Dubuc'" <edubuc@dm.uba.ar>,
"'Categories list'" <categories@mta.ca>
Subject: R: disjoint_coproducts_?
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 13:04:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <E1V2JNN-0002fR-3o@mlist.mta.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1V1wB2-0006lJ-Sa@mlist.mta.ca>
Dear Eduardo,
Your statement is valid internally in SS, that is once formalized in the
internal language of the topos SS; this can be done in geometric logic, by
considering a (possibly infinitary) disjunction over all the arrows f: C
---> X for C in CC (interpreted by the arrows Ff in SS) and existential
quantifications. If you want a statement valid 'externally', you should
instead use generalized elements in SS and epimorphic families involving
their domains.
I hope this helps.
Best regards,
Olivia
> -----Messaggio originale-----
> Da: Eduardo J. Dubuc [mailto:edubuc@dm.uba.ar]
> Inviato: mercoledì 24 luglio 2013 00:45
> A: Categories list
> Oggetto: categories: disjoint_coproducts_?
>
> Hello, I have the following question:
>
> Assume a topos SS as the base topos, and work in this topos as in naive
set
> theory (without choice or excluded middle). Take a Grothendieck topos EE
---
>> SS with a site of definition CC. As usual in the literature
(Joyal-Tierney,
> Moerdijk, Bunge, and many more) consider that CC has objects, and that
> these objects are objects of EE which are generators in the sense that
given
> any X in EE, the family of all
> f: C ---> X, all C in CC, is epimorphic. Consider F: CC ---> SS to be the
inverse
> image of a point. Then the family Ff: FC ---> FX is epimorphic in SS.
>
> My question is:
>
> Can I do the following ? (meaning, is it correct the following arguing,
certainly
> valid if SS is the topos of sets):
>
> Given a in FX, take f:C ---> X and c in FC such that a = Ff(c).
>
> We can break this question in two:
>
> 1) Does it make sense to take
>
> E = COPRODUCT_{all f: C ---> X, all C in CC} FC ?
>
> We have g: E ---> FX an epimorphism, so we can take c in E such that a =
g(c).
>
> Then we would need the validity of:
>
> 2) Given x in COPRODUCT_{i in I} S_i , then x in S_i for some i in I.
>
> greetings e.d.
>
>
[For admin and other information see: http://www.mta.ca/~cat-dist/ ]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-24 11:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-07-23 22:45 disjoint_coproducts_? Eduardo J. Dubuc
2013-07-24 11:04 ` Olivia Caramello [this message]
2013-07-25 11:33 ` disjoint_coproducts_? Thomas Streicher
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=E1V2JNN-0002fR-3o@mlist.mta.ca \
--to=oc233@hermes.cam.ac.uk \
--cc=categories@mta.ca \
--cc=edubuc@dm.uba.ar \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).