Proving for two naturally isomorphic functors, if one is full, then so is the other. [duplicate]












0















This question already has an answer here:




  • What properties do natural isomorphisms between functors preserve?

    1 answer




So we let $S,T : mathscr{C} rightarrow mathscr{D}$ be naturally isomorphic functors. We seek to show that if $S$ is a full functor, then so is $T$.



As given, we have a natural isomorphism $tau : S rightarrow T$, which also means that each component of it $tau_A : S(A) rightarrow T(A)$ is invertible.



From here, though, I get pretty lost and have no clue where to go. I'm not even 100% sure how to best show surjectivity in the context of category theory. I feel like that I would have to use the inverse of the natural transformation, $tau^{-1}$, and that surjectivity implies right-cancellativity, i.e. $S$'s arrow function has a right-sided inverse $S^{-1}$. But I'm honestly just lost.



Does anyone have a potential nudge in the right direction?










share|cite|improve this question















marked as duplicate by Arnaud D., jgon, KReiser, Cesareo, Chinnapparaj R Nov 22 at 2:12


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.




















    0















    This question already has an answer here:




    • What properties do natural isomorphisms between functors preserve?

      1 answer




    So we let $S,T : mathscr{C} rightarrow mathscr{D}$ be naturally isomorphic functors. We seek to show that if $S$ is a full functor, then so is $T$.



    As given, we have a natural isomorphism $tau : S rightarrow T$, which also means that each component of it $tau_A : S(A) rightarrow T(A)$ is invertible.



    From here, though, I get pretty lost and have no clue where to go. I'm not even 100% sure how to best show surjectivity in the context of category theory. I feel like that I would have to use the inverse of the natural transformation, $tau^{-1}$, and that surjectivity implies right-cancellativity, i.e. $S$'s arrow function has a right-sided inverse $S^{-1}$. But I'm honestly just lost.



    Does anyone have a potential nudge in the right direction?










    share|cite|improve this question















    marked as duplicate by Arnaud D., jgon, KReiser, Cesareo, Chinnapparaj R Nov 22 at 2:12


    This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.


















      0












      0








      0








      This question already has an answer here:




      • What properties do natural isomorphisms between functors preserve?

        1 answer




      So we let $S,T : mathscr{C} rightarrow mathscr{D}$ be naturally isomorphic functors. We seek to show that if $S$ is a full functor, then so is $T$.



      As given, we have a natural isomorphism $tau : S rightarrow T$, which also means that each component of it $tau_A : S(A) rightarrow T(A)$ is invertible.



      From here, though, I get pretty lost and have no clue where to go. I'm not even 100% sure how to best show surjectivity in the context of category theory. I feel like that I would have to use the inverse of the natural transformation, $tau^{-1}$, and that surjectivity implies right-cancellativity, i.e. $S$'s arrow function has a right-sided inverse $S^{-1}$. But I'm honestly just lost.



      Does anyone have a potential nudge in the right direction?










      share|cite|improve this question
















      This question already has an answer here:




      • What properties do natural isomorphisms between functors preserve?

        1 answer




      So we let $S,T : mathscr{C} rightarrow mathscr{D}$ be naturally isomorphic functors. We seek to show that if $S$ is a full functor, then so is $T$.



      As given, we have a natural isomorphism $tau : S rightarrow T$, which also means that each component of it $tau_A : S(A) rightarrow T(A)$ is invertible.



      From here, though, I get pretty lost and have no clue where to go. I'm not even 100% sure how to best show surjectivity in the context of category theory. I feel like that I would have to use the inverse of the natural transformation, $tau^{-1}$, and that surjectivity implies right-cancellativity, i.e. $S$'s arrow function has a right-sided inverse $S^{-1}$. But I'm honestly just lost.



      Does anyone have a potential nudge in the right direction?





      This question already has an answer here:




      • What properties do natural isomorphisms between functors preserve?

        1 answer








      category-theory functors natural-transformations






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Nov 19 at 0:31









      Erick Wong

      20.1k22666




      20.1k22666










      asked Nov 18 at 22:54









      Eevee Trainer

      4,3881632




      4,3881632




      marked as duplicate by Arnaud D., jgon, KReiser, Cesareo, Chinnapparaj R Nov 22 at 2:12


      This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.






      marked as duplicate by Arnaud D., jgon, KReiser, Cesareo, Chinnapparaj R Nov 22 at 2:12


      This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
























          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2














          Recall that a natural isomorphism $η : F →̣ G$ means we have
          $η ∘ F f = G f ∘ η$ for all $f$, moreover the $eta$ are invertible.



          Now the required proof progresses as follows :-)



          $$defroom{qquadqquadqquadqquadqquad}$$



          begin{align*}
          & F ; mathsf{full}
          \ ≡; & color{green}{{text{ Definition of full }}} \
          & ∀x,y • ∀ f′ : F x → F • ∃ f : x → y ;• room F f = f′
          \ ≡; & color{green}{{text{ Using natural isomorphism }}} \
          & ∀x,y • ∀ f′ : F x → F • ∃ f : x → y ;•room η⁻¹ ∘ G f ∘ η = f′
          \ ≡; & color{green}{{text{ Using natural isomorphism }}} \
          & ∀x,y • ∀ f′ : F x → F • ∃ f : x → y ;•room G f = η ∘ f′ ∘ η⁻¹
          \ ≡; & color{green}{{text{ Local declaration ---aka `one point rule' }}} \
          & ∀x,y • ∀ f′ : F x → F • ∀ f″ : G x → G y • ∃ f : x → y ;• room G f = f″ quad ∧ quad f″ = η ∘ f′ ∘ η⁻¹
          \ ⇒; & color{green}{{text{ Weaken by discarding a conjunct }}} \
          & ∀ x,y • ∀ f′ : F x → F y • ∀ f″ : G x → G y • ∃ f : x → y ;• qquad G f = f″
          \ ⇒ ; & color{green}{{text{ Remove superfluous $∀ f′$ }}} \
          & ∀ x,y • ∀ f″ : G x → G y • ∃ f : x → y ;•room G f = f″
          \ ≡ ; & color{green}{{text{ Definition of full }}} \
          & G ; mathsf{full} & &
          end{align*}






          share|cite|improve this answer





























            1














            Hint: You have to relate the maps $hom(c,d)to hom(S(c),S(d))$ and $hom(c,d)tohom(T(c),T(d))$ for any $c,dinmathscr C$. This can be done by using the natural isomorphism in order to produce a bijective map $hom(S(c),S(d))to hom(T(c), T(d))$ that commutes with the above maps.






            share|cite|improve this answer




























              2 Answers
              2






              active

              oldest

              votes








              2 Answers
              2






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes









              2














              Recall that a natural isomorphism $η : F →̣ G$ means we have
              $η ∘ F f = G f ∘ η$ for all $f$, moreover the $eta$ are invertible.



              Now the required proof progresses as follows :-)



              $$defroom{qquadqquadqquadqquadqquad}$$



              begin{align*}
              & F ; mathsf{full}
              \ ≡; & color{green}{{text{ Definition of full }}} \
              & ∀x,y • ∀ f′ : F x → F • ∃ f : x → y ;• room F f = f′
              \ ≡; & color{green}{{text{ Using natural isomorphism }}} \
              & ∀x,y • ∀ f′ : F x → F • ∃ f : x → y ;•room η⁻¹ ∘ G f ∘ η = f′
              \ ≡; & color{green}{{text{ Using natural isomorphism }}} \
              & ∀x,y • ∀ f′ : F x → F • ∃ f : x → y ;•room G f = η ∘ f′ ∘ η⁻¹
              \ ≡; & color{green}{{text{ Local declaration ---aka `one point rule' }}} \
              & ∀x,y • ∀ f′ : F x → F • ∀ f″ : G x → G y • ∃ f : x → y ;• room G f = f″ quad ∧ quad f″ = η ∘ f′ ∘ η⁻¹
              \ ⇒; & color{green}{{text{ Weaken by discarding a conjunct }}} \
              & ∀ x,y • ∀ f′ : F x → F y • ∀ f″ : G x → G y • ∃ f : x → y ;• qquad G f = f″
              \ ⇒ ; & color{green}{{text{ Remove superfluous $∀ f′$ }}} \
              & ∀ x,y • ∀ f″ : G x → G y • ∃ f : x → y ;•room G f = f″
              \ ≡ ; & color{green}{{text{ Definition of full }}} \
              & G ; mathsf{full} & &
              end{align*}






              share|cite|improve this answer


























                2














                Recall that a natural isomorphism $η : F →̣ G$ means we have
                $η ∘ F f = G f ∘ η$ for all $f$, moreover the $eta$ are invertible.



                Now the required proof progresses as follows :-)



                $$defroom{qquadqquadqquadqquadqquad}$$



                begin{align*}
                & F ; mathsf{full}
                \ ≡; & color{green}{{text{ Definition of full }}} \
                & ∀x,y • ∀ f′ : F x → F • ∃ f : x → y ;• room F f = f′
                \ ≡; & color{green}{{text{ Using natural isomorphism }}} \
                & ∀x,y • ∀ f′ : F x → F • ∃ f : x → y ;•room η⁻¹ ∘ G f ∘ η = f′
                \ ≡; & color{green}{{text{ Using natural isomorphism }}} \
                & ∀x,y • ∀ f′ : F x → F • ∃ f : x → y ;•room G f = η ∘ f′ ∘ η⁻¹
                \ ≡; & color{green}{{text{ Local declaration ---aka `one point rule' }}} \
                & ∀x,y • ∀ f′ : F x → F • ∀ f″ : G x → G y • ∃ f : x → y ;• room G f = f″ quad ∧ quad f″ = η ∘ f′ ∘ η⁻¹
                \ ⇒; & color{green}{{text{ Weaken by discarding a conjunct }}} \
                & ∀ x,y • ∀ f′ : F x → F y • ∀ f″ : G x → G y • ∃ f : x → y ;• qquad G f = f″
                \ ⇒ ; & color{green}{{text{ Remove superfluous $∀ f′$ }}} \
                & ∀ x,y • ∀ f″ : G x → G y • ∃ f : x → y ;•room G f = f″
                \ ≡ ; & color{green}{{text{ Definition of full }}} \
                & G ; mathsf{full} & &
                end{align*}






                share|cite|improve this answer
























                  2












                  2








                  2






                  Recall that a natural isomorphism $η : F →̣ G$ means we have
                  $η ∘ F f = G f ∘ η$ for all $f$, moreover the $eta$ are invertible.



                  Now the required proof progresses as follows :-)



                  $$defroom{qquadqquadqquadqquadqquad}$$



                  begin{align*}
                  & F ; mathsf{full}
                  \ ≡; & color{green}{{text{ Definition of full }}} \
                  & ∀x,y • ∀ f′ : F x → F • ∃ f : x → y ;• room F f = f′
                  \ ≡; & color{green}{{text{ Using natural isomorphism }}} \
                  & ∀x,y • ∀ f′ : F x → F • ∃ f : x → y ;•room η⁻¹ ∘ G f ∘ η = f′
                  \ ≡; & color{green}{{text{ Using natural isomorphism }}} \
                  & ∀x,y • ∀ f′ : F x → F • ∃ f : x → y ;•room G f = η ∘ f′ ∘ η⁻¹
                  \ ≡; & color{green}{{text{ Local declaration ---aka `one point rule' }}} \
                  & ∀x,y • ∀ f′ : F x → F • ∀ f″ : G x → G y • ∃ f : x → y ;• room G f = f″ quad ∧ quad f″ = η ∘ f′ ∘ η⁻¹
                  \ ⇒; & color{green}{{text{ Weaken by discarding a conjunct }}} \
                  & ∀ x,y • ∀ f′ : F x → F y • ∀ f″ : G x → G y • ∃ f : x → y ;• qquad G f = f″
                  \ ⇒ ; & color{green}{{text{ Remove superfluous $∀ f′$ }}} \
                  & ∀ x,y • ∀ f″ : G x → G y • ∃ f : x → y ;•room G f = f″
                  \ ≡ ; & color{green}{{text{ Definition of full }}} \
                  & G ; mathsf{full} & &
                  end{align*}






                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  Recall that a natural isomorphism $η : F →̣ G$ means we have
                  $η ∘ F f = G f ∘ η$ for all $f$, moreover the $eta$ are invertible.



                  Now the required proof progresses as follows :-)



                  $$defroom{qquadqquadqquadqquadqquad}$$



                  begin{align*}
                  & F ; mathsf{full}
                  \ ≡; & color{green}{{text{ Definition of full }}} \
                  & ∀x,y • ∀ f′ : F x → F • ∃ f : x → y ;• room F f = f′
                  \ ≡; & color{green}{{text{ Using natural isomorphism }}} \
                  & ∀x,y • ∀ f′ : F x → F • ∃ f : x → y ;•room η⁻¹ ∘ G f ∘ η = f′
                  \ ≡; & color{green}{{text{ Using natural isomorphism }}} \
                  & ∀x,y • ∀ f′ : F x → F • ∃ f : x → y ;•room G f = η ∘ f′ ∘ η⁻¹
                  \ ≡; & color{green}{{text{ Local declaration ---aka `one point rule' }}} \
                  & ∀x,y • ∀ f′ : F x → F • ∀ f″ : G x → G y • ∃ f : x → y ;• room G f = f″ quad ∧ quad f″ = η ∘ f′ ∘ η⁻¹
                  \ ⇒; & color{green}{{text{ Weaken by discarding a conjunct }}} \
                  & ∀ x,y • ∀ f′ : F x → F y • ∀ f″ : G x → G y • ∃ f : x → y ;• qquad G f = f″
                  \ ⇒ ; & color{green}{{text{ Remove superfluous $∀ f′$ }}} \
                  & ∀ x,y • ∀ f″ : G x → G y • ∃ f : x → y ;•room G f = f″
                  \ ≡ ; & color{green}{{text{ Definition of full }}} \
                  & G ; mathsf{full} & &
                  end{align*}







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Nov 19 at 1:19









                  Musa Al-hassy

                  1,3091711




                  1,3091711























                      1














                      Hint: You have to relate the maps $hom(c,d)to hom(S(c),S(d))$ and $hom(c,d)tohom(T(c),T(d))$ for any $c,dinmathscr C$. This can be done by using the natural isomorphism in order to produce a bijective map $hom(S(c),S(d))to hom(T(c), T(d))$ that commutes with the above maps.






                      share|cite|improve this answer


























                        1














                        Hint: You have to relate the maps $hom(c,d)to hom(S(c),S(d))$ and $hom(c,d)tohom(T(c),T(d))$ for any $c,dinmathscr C$. This can be done by using the natural isomorphism in order to produce a bijective map $hom(S(c),S(d))to hom(T(c), T(d))$ that commutes with the above maps.






                        share|cite|improve this answer
























                          1












                          1








                          1






                          Hint: You have to relate the maps $hom(c,d)to hom(S(c),S(d))$ and $hom(c,d)tohom(T(c),T(d))$ for any $c,dinmathscr C$. This can be done by using the natural isomorphism in order to produce a bijective map $hom(S(c),S(d))to hom(T(c), T(d))$ that commutes with the above maps.






                          share|cite|improve this answer












                          Hint: You have to relate the maps $hom(c,d)to hom(S(c),S(d))$ and $hom(c,d)tohom(T(c),T(d))$ for any $c,dinmathscr C$. This can be done by using the natural isomorphism in order to produce a bijective map $hom(S(c),S(d))to hom(T(c), T(d))$ that commutes with the above maps.







                          share|cite|improve this answer












                          share|cite|improve this answer



                          share|cite|improve this answer










                          answered Nov 18 at 23:03









                          asdq

                          1,7411418




                          1,7411418















                              Popular posts from this blog

                              AnyDesk - Fatal Program Failure

                              How to calibrate 16:9 built-in touch-screen to a 4:3 resolution?

                              QoS: MAC-Priority for clients behind a repeater