Exercise about product of graphs in âConceptual Mathematicsâ
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Please tell me how to solve the following exercise which is in the book "Conceptual Mathematics A first introduction to categories Second Edition".
How can I show that for any object X of category of graphs the diagram is commutative from the fact that following two diagrams are commutative?
category-theory
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Please tell me how to solve the following exercise which is in the book "Conceptual Mathematics A first introduction to categories Second Edition".
How can I show that for any object X of category of graphs the diagram is commutative from the fact that following two diagrams are commutative?
category-theory
Welcome to MathStackExchange. It is generally recommended to avoid pointing to images with texts and prints from books, and rather retype everything here. This helps this site to become more self-contained, and shows some work. It is also good practice to re-state the problem in your own words (as it's helpful on its own, and may reveals where your lack of understanding is). If you've made any attempt on solving the exercise, it is also kind of you to post it here. Please note you can edit your question anytime.
â Mefitico
Sep 3 at 14:08
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Please tell me how to solve the following exercise which is in the book "Conceptual Mathematics A first introduction to categories Second Edition".
How can I show that for any object X of category of graphs the diagram is commutative from the fact that following two diagrams are commutative?
category-theory
Please tell me how to solve the following exercise which is in the book "Conceptual Mathematics A first introduction to categories Second Edition".
How can I show that for any object X of category of graphs the diagram is commutative from the fact that following two diagrams are commutative?
category-theory
category-theory
edited Sep 3 at 14:22
Arnaud D.
14.9k52142
14.9k52142
asked Sep 3 at 13:54
konyonyo
103
103
Welcome to MathStackExchange. It is generally recommended to avoid pointing to images with texts and prints from books, and rather retype everything here. This helps this site to become more self-contained, and shows some work. It is also good practice to re-state the problem in your own words (as it's helpful on its own, and may reveals where your lack of understanding is). If you've made any attempt on solving the exercise, it is also kind of you to post it here. Please note you can edit your question anytime.
â Mefitico
Sep 3 at 14:08
add a comment |Â
Welcome to MathStackExchange. It is generally recommended to avoid pointing to images with texts and prints from books, and rather retype everything here. This helps this site to become more self-contained, and shows some work. It is also good practice to re-state the problem in your own words (as it's helpful on its own, and may reveals where your lack of understanding is). If you've made any attempt on solving the exercise, it is also kind of you to post it here. Please note you can edit your question anytime.
â Mefitico
Sep 3 at 14:08
Welcome to MathStackExchange. It is generally recommended to avoid pointing to images with texts and prints from books, and rather retype everything here. This helps this site to become more self-contained, and shows some work. It is also good practice to re-state the problem in your own words (as it's helpful on its own, and may reveals where your lack of understanding is). If you've made any attempt on solving the exercise, it is also kind of you to post it here. Please note you can edit your question anytime.
â Mefitico
Sep 3 at 14:08
Welcome to MathStackExchange. It is generally recommended to avoid pointing to images with texts and prints from books, and rather retype everything here. This helps this site to become more self-contained, and shows some work. It is also good practice to re-state the problem in your own words (as it's helpful on its own, and may reveals where your lack of understanding is). If you've made any attempt on solving the exercise, it is also kind of you to post it here. Please note you can edit your question anytime.
â Mefitico
Sep 3 at 14:08
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
The first observation to make is that given $B_1overseta_1leftarrow Coverseta_2rightarrow B_2$, a morphism $Ato C$ (resp. $Dto C$) gives rise to a pair of morphisms $B_1leftarrow Arightarrow B_2$ (resp. $B_1leftarrow Drightarrow B_2$) by composition with the $a_i$. And by hypothesis, such pairs correspond to morphisms $Ato P$ (resp. $Dto P$). If there are morphisms $f,g:Cto P$ with $$pi_1circ f=pi_1circ g=a_1$$ and $$pi_2circ f=pi_2circ g=a_2,$$ then for any $x:Ato C$ it's easy to check that $fcirc x=gcirc x$ by $P$ being a "product with respect to $A$ and $D$", and similarly for any morphism $Dto C$; but then $f=g$ by the (italicized in the text) property of morphisms from $A$ or $D$. So if there is a morphism $f:Cto P$ making $pi_icirc f=a_i$, it is unique.
How do we prove the existence of such a unique $f$? I don't believe the authors have mentioned the really nice thing yet about this category of graphs, where every object is actually a colimit of a diagram consisting of $A$s and $D$s; from this, existence is almost immediate. But you can figure it out element-wise by taking an edge $e$ of $C$ to $langle a_1circ tildee,a_2circ tildeerangle(e_0)$, where $tildee$ is the morphism $Ato C$ that picks out the edge $e$, $e_0$ is the unique edge of $A$, and $langle a_1circ tildee,a_2circ tildeerangle$ is the unique morphism $Ato P$ corresponding to the pair of morphisms $a_icirctildee:Ato B_i$ (and you do the essentially thing for the graph's vertices and morphisms $Dto C$).
All that's needed is to confirm that this assignment really is a morphism of graphs, which is boring but not too hard. It should be clear that the process I've just described gives us a function from the edges of $C$ to the edges of $P$, and likewise for the vertices. All that's needed to check that it's a morphism of graphs is to check that $$s_P(langle a_1circtildee,a_2circtildeerangle(e_0))=langle a_1circwidetildes_C(e),a_2circwidetildes_C(e)rangle(d_0)$$ and likewise $$t_P(langle a_1circtildee,a_2circtildeerangle(e_0))=langle a_1circwidetildet_C(e),a_2circwidetildet_C(e)rangle(d_0),$$ where $d_0$ and $s_ldots$ and $t_ldots$ are the source and target operations on the subscripted graphs. What will make this easier to check is that if $d=s_C(e)$, then, where $x_1,x_2:Dto A$ are the morphisms picking out the source and target vertices respectively in $A$, then $$widetildes_C(e)=tilded=tildeecirc x_1$$ and $$widetildet_C(e)=tildeecirc x_2.$$ Moreover $$s_P(langle a_1circtildee,a_2circtildeerangle(e_0))=langle a_1circtildee,a_2circtildeeranglecirc x_1(d_0),$$ and similarly with $t$ and $x_2$. With these equalities it should be easy to check.
Thank you for answering. I understood the uniqueness of morphism $f: C to P$.
â konyonyo
Sep 7 at 1:49
But I feel difficult to prove the existance of $f$. I think that $<a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>(e)$ is an element of $P$, and that $<a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>$ is a morphism $C to P$. But you are saying that $<a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>$ is the unique morphism $A to P$. I am thinking about this difference.
â konyonyo
Sep 7 at 2:04
@konyonyo - That should fix the mistake, and also give you a much stronger lead on confirming the existence of the relevant morphism.
â Malice Vidrine
Sep 7 at 4:24
$f$ is a map such that $e mapsto <a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>(e_0)$, and $d mapsto <a_1 circ tilded, a_2 circ tilded>(d_0)$. It is needed to show that $f$ is a morphism of graphs, i.e. that $s_P(<a_1circ tildee,a_2circtildee>(e_0))=<a_1circtildes_C(e),a_2circtildes_C(e)>(d_0)$ and similar equation for $t_P$. I assigned $tildes_C(e)=tildeecirc x_1$ to the right hand side of the equation. And right hand side of it becomes $<a_1circtildeecirc x_1, a_2circtildeecirc x_1>(d_0)=<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$.
â konyonyo
Sep 8 at 5:03
Then $<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$ is equal to $s_P(<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>(e_0))$.
â konyonyo
Sep 8 at 5:08
 |Â
show 2 more comments
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
The first observation to make is that given $B_1overseta_1leftarrow Coverseta_2rightarrow B_2$, a morphism $Ato C$ (resp. $Dto C$) gives rise to a pair of morphisms $B_1leftarrow Arightarrow B_2$ (resp. $B_1leftarrow Drightarrow B_2$) by composition with the $a_i$. And by hypothesis, such pairs correspond to morphisms $Ato P$ (resp. $Dto P$). If there are morphisms $f,g:Cto P$ with $$pi_1circ f=pi_1circ g=a_1$$ and $$pi_2circ f=pi_2circ g=a_2,$$ then for any $x:Ato C$ it's easy to check that $fcirc x=gcirc x$ by $P$ being a "product with respect to $A$ and $D$", and similarly for any morphism $Dto C$; but then $f=g$ by the (italicized in the text) property of morphisms from $A$ or $D$. So if there is a morphism $f:Cto P$ making $pi_icirc f=a_i$, it is unique.
How do we prove the existence of such a unique $f$? I don't believe the authors have mentioned the really nice thing yet about this category of graphs, where every object is actually a colimit of a diagram consisting of $A$s and $D$s; from this, existence is almost immediate. But you can figure it out element-wise by taking an edge $e$ of $C$ to $langle a_1circ tildee,a_2circ tildeerangle(e_0)$, where $tildee$ is the morphism $Ato C$ that picks out the edge $e$, $e_0$ is the unique edge of $A$, and $langle a_1circ tildee,a_2circ tildeerangle$ is the unique morphism $Ato P$ corresponding to the pair of morphisms $a_icirctildee:Ato B_i$ (and you do the essentially thing for the graph's vertices and morphisms $Dto C$).
All that's needed is to confirm that this assignment really is a morphism of graphs, which is boring but not too hard. It should be clear that the process I've just described gives us a function from the edges of $C$ to the edges of $P$, and likewise for the vertices. All that's needed to check that it's a morphism of graphs is to check that $$s_P(langle a_1circtildee,a_2circtildeerangle(e_0))=langle a_1circwidetildes_C(e),a_2circwidetildes_C(e)rangle(d_0)$$ and likewise $$t_P(langle a_1circtildee,a_2circtildeerangle(e_0))=langle a_1circwidetildet_C(e),a_2circwidetildet_C(e)rangle(d_0),$$ where $d_0$ and $s_ldots$ and $t_ldots$ are the source and target operations on the subscripted graphs. What will make this easier to check is that if $d=s_C(e)$, then, where $x_1,x_2:Dto A$ are the morphisms picking out the source and target vertices respectively in $A$, then $$widetildes_C(e)=tilded=tildeecirc x_1$$ and $$widetildet_C(e)=tildeecirc x_2.$$ Moreover $$s_P(langle a_1circtildee,a_2circtildeerangle(e_0))=langle a_1circtildee,a_2circtildeeranglecirc x_1(d_0),$$ and similarly with $t$ and $x_2$. With these equalities it should be easy to check.
Thank you for answering. I understood the uniqueness of morphism $f: C to P$.
â konyonyo
Sep 7 at 1:49
But I feel difficult to prove the existance of $f$. I think that $<a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>(e)$ is an element of $P$, and that $<a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>$ is a morphism $C to P$. But you are saying that $<a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>$ is the unique morphism $A to P$. I am thinking about this difference.
â konyonyo
Sep 7 at 2:04
@konyonyo - That should fix the mistake, and also give you a much stronger lead on confirming the existence of the relevant morphism.
â Malice Vidrine
Sep 7 at 4:24
$f$ is a map such that $e mapsto <a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>(e_0)$, and $d mapsto <a_1 circ tilded, a_2 circ tilded>(d_0)$. It is needed to show that $f$ is a morphism of graphs, i.e. that $s_P(<a_1circ tildee,a_2circtildee>(e_0))=<a_1circtildes_C(e),a_2circtildes_C(e)>(d_0)$ and similar equation for $t_P$. I assigned $tildes_C(e)=tildeecirc x_1$ to the right hand side of the equation. And right hand side of it becomes $<a_1circtildeecirc x_1, a_2circtildeecirc x_1>(d_0)=<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$.
â konyonyo
Sep 8 at 5:03
Then $<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$ is equal to $s_P(<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>(e_0))$.
â konyonyo
Sep 8 at 5:08
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
The first observation to make is that given $B_1overseta_1leftarrow Coverseta_2rightarrow B_2$, a morphism $Ato C$ (resp. $Dto C$) gives rise to a pair of morphisms $B_1leftarrow Arightarrow B_2$ (resp. $B_1leftarrow Drightarrow B_2$) by composition with the $a_i$. And by hypothesis, such pairs correspond to morphisms $Ato P$ (resp. $Dto P$). If there are morphisms $f,g:Cto P$ with $$pi_1circ f=pi_1circ g=a_1$$ and $$pi_2circ f=pi_2circ g=a_2,$$ then for any $x:Ato C$ it's easy to check that $fcirc x=gcirc x$ by $P$ being a "product with respect to $A$ and $D$", and similarly for any morphism $Dto C$; but then $f=g$ by the (italicized in the text) property of morphisms from $A$ or $D$. So if there is a morphism $f:Cto P$ making $pi_icirc f=a_i$, it is unique.
How do we prove the existence of such a unique $f$? I don't believe the authors have mentioned the really nice thing yet about this category of graphs, where every object is actually a colimit of a diagram consisting of $A$s and $D$s; from this, existence is almost immediate. But you can figure it out element-wise by taking an edge $e$ of $C$ to $langle a_1circ tildee,a_2circ tildeerangle(e_0)$, where $tildee$ is the morphism $Ato C$ that picks out the edge $e$, $e_0$ is the unique edge of $A$, and $langle a_1circ tildee,a_2circ tildeerangle$ is the unique morphism $Ato P$ corresponding to the pair of morphisms $a_icirctildee:Ato B_i$ (and you do the essentially thing for the graph's vertices and morphisms $Dto C$).
All that's needed is to confirm that this assignment really is a morphism of graphs, which is boring but not too hard. It should be clear that the process I've just described gives us a function from the edges of $C$ to the edges of $P$, and likewise for the vertices. All that's needed to check that it's a morphism of graphs is to check that $$s_P(langle a_1circtildee,a_2circtildeerangle(e_0))=langle a_1circwidetildes_C(e),a_2circwidetildes_C(e)rangle(d_0)$$ and likewise $$t_P(langle a_1circtildee,a_2circtildeerangle(e_0))=langle a_1circwidetildet_C(e),a_2circwidetildet_C(e)rangle(d_0),$$ where $d_0$ and $s_ldots$ and $t_ldots$ are the source and target operations on the subscripted graphs. What will make this easier to check is that if $d=s_C(e)$, then, where $x_1,x_2:Dto A$ are the morphisms picking out the source and target vertices respectively in $A$, then $$widetildes_C(e)=tilded=tildeecirc x_1$$ and $$widetildet_C(e)=tildeecirc x_2.$$ Moreover $$s_P(langle a_1circtildee,a_2circtildeerangle(e_0))=langle a_1circtildee,a_2circtildeeranglecirc x_1(d_0),$$ and similarly with $t$ and $x_2$. With these equalities it should be easy to check.
Thank you for answering. I understood the uniqueness of morphism $f: C to P$.
â konyonyo
Sep 7 at 1:49
But I feel difficult to prove the existance of $f$. I think that $<a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>(e)$ is an element of $P$, and that $<a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>$ is a morphism $C to P$. But you are saying that $<a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>$ is the unique morphism $A to P$. I am thinking about this difference.
â konyonyo
Sep 7 at 2:04
@konyonyo - That should fix the mistake, and also give you a much stronger lead on confirming the existence of the relevant morphism.
â Malice Vidrine
Sep 7 at 4:24
$f$ is a map such that $e mapsto <a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>(e_0)$, and $d mapsto <a_1 circ tilded, a_2 circ tilded>(d_0)$. It is needed to show that $f$ is a morphism of graphs, i.e. that $s_P(<a_1circ tildee,a_2circtildee>(e_0))=<a_1circtildes_C(e),a_2circtildes_C(e)>(d_0)$ and similar equation for $t_P$. I assigned $tildes_C(e)=tildeecirc x_1$ to the right hand side of the equation. And right hand side of it becomes $<a_1circtildeecirc x_1, a_2circtildeecirc x_1>(d_0)=<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$.
â konyonyo
Sep 8 at 5:03
Then $<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$ is equal to $s_P(<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>(e_0))$.
â konyonyo
Sep 8 at 5:08
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
The first observation to make is that given $B_1overseta_1leftarrow Coverseta_2rightarrow B_2$, a morphism $Ato C$ (resp. $Dto C$) gives rise to a pair of morphisms $B_1leftarrow Arightarrow B_2$ (resp. $B_1leftarrow Drightarrow B_2$) by composition with the $a_i$. And by hypothesis, such pairs correspond to morphisms $Ato P$ (resp. $Dto P$). If there are morphisms $f,g:Cto P$ with $$pi_1circ f=pi_1circ g=a_1$$ and $$pi_2circ f=pi_2circ g=a_2,$$ then for any $x:Ato C$ it's easy to check that $fcirc x=gcirc x$ by $P$ being a "product with respect to $A$ and $D$", and similarly for any morphism $Dto C$; but then $f=g$ by the (italicized in the text) property of morphisms from $A$ or $D$. So if there is a morphism $f:Cto P$ making $pi_icirc f=a_i$, it is unique.
How do we prove the existence of such a unique $f$? I don't believe the authors have mentioned the really nice thing yet about this category of graphs, where every object is actually a colimit of a diagram consisting of $A$s and $D$s; from this, existence is almost immediate. But you can figure it out element-wise by taking an edge $e$ of $C$ to $langle a_1circ tildee,a_2circ tildeerangle(e_0)$, where $tildee$ is the morphism $Ato C$ that picks out the edge $e$, $e_0$ is the unique edge of $A$, and $langle a_1circ tildee,a_2circ tildeerangle$ is the unique morphism $Ato P$ corresponding to the pair of morphisms $a_icirctildee:Ato B_i$ (and you do the essentially thing for the graph's vertices and morphisms $Dto C$).
All that's needed is to confirm that this assignment really is a morphism of graphs, which is boring but not too hard. It should be clear that the process I've just described gives us a function from the edges of $C$ to the edges of $P$, and likewise for the vertices. All that's needed to check that it's a morphism of graphs is to check that $$s_P(langle a_1circtildee,a_2circtildeerangle(e_0))=langle a_1circwidetildes_C(e),a_2circwidetildes_C(e)rangle(d_0)$$ and likewise $$t_P(langle a_1circtildee,a_2circtildeerangle(e_0))=langle a_1circwidetildet_C(e),a_2circwidetildet_C(e)rangle(d_0),$$ where $d_0$ and $s_ldots$ and $t_ldots$ are the source and target operations on the subscripted graphs. What will make this easier to check is that if $d=s_C(e)$, then, where $x_1,x_2:Dto A$ are the morphisms picking out the source and target vertices respectively in $A$, then $$widetildes_C(e)=tilded=tildeecirc x_1$$ and $$widetildet_C(e)=tildeecirc x_2.$$ Moreover $$s_P(langle a_1circtildee,a_2circtildeerangle(e_0))=langle a_1circtildee,a_2circtildeeranglecirc x_1(d_0),$$ and similarly with $t$ and $x_2$. With these equalities it should be easy to check.
The first observation to make is that given $B_1overseta_1leftarrow Coverseta_2rightarrow B_2$, a morphism $Ato C$ (resp. $Dto C$) gives rise to a pair of morphisms $B_1leftarrow Arightarrow B_2$ (resp. $B_1leftarrow Drightarrow B_2$) by composition with the $a_i$. And by hypothesis, such pairs correspond to morphisms $Ato P$ (resp. $Dto P$). If there are morphisms $f,g:Cto P$ with $$pi_1circ f=pi_1circ g=a_1$$ and $$pi_2circ f=pi_2circ g=a_2,$$ then for any $x:Ato C$ it's easy to check that $fcirc x=gcirc x$ by $P$ being a "product with respect to $A$ and $D$", and similarly for any morphism $Dto C$; but then $f=g$ by the (italicized in the text) property of morphisms from $A$ or $D$. So if there is a morphism $f:Cto P$ making $pi_icirc f=a_i$, it is unique.
How do we prove the existence of such a unique $f$? I don't believe the authors have mentioned the really nice thing yet about this category of graphs, where every object is actually a colimit of a diagram consisting of $A$s and $D$s; from this, existence is almost immediate. But you can figure it out element-wise by taking an edge $e$ of $C$ to $langle a_1circ tildee,a_2circ tildeerangle(e_0)$, where $tildee$ is the morphism $Ato C$ that picks out the edge $e$, $e_0$ is the unique edge of $A$, and $langle a_1circ tildee,a_2circ tildeerangle$ is the unique morphism $Ato P$ corresponding to the pair of morphisms $a_icirctildee:Ato B_i$ (and you do the essentially thing for the graph's vertices and morphisms $Dto C$).
All that's needed is to confirm that this assignment really is a morphism of graphs, which is boring but not too hard. It should be clear that the process I've just described gives us a function from the edges of $C$ to the edges of $P$, and likewise for the vertices. All that's needed to check that it's a morphism of graphs is to check that $$s_P(langle a_1circtildee,a_2circtildeerangle(e_0))=langle a_1circwidetildes_C(e),a_2circwidetildes_C(e)rangle(d_0)$$ and likewise $$t_P(langle a_1circtildee,a_2circtildeerangle(e_0))=langle a_1circwidetildet_C(e),a_2circwidetildet_C(e)rangle(d_0),$$ where $d_0$ and $s_ldots$ and $t_ldots$ are the source and target operations on the subscripted graphs. What will make this easier to check is that if $d=s_C(e)$, then, where $x_1,x_2:Dto A$ are the morphisms picking out the source and target vertices respectively in $A$, then $$widetildes_C(e)=tilded=tildeecirc x_1$$ and $$widetildet_C(e)=tildeecirc x_2.$$ Moreover $$s_P(langle a_1circtildee,a_2circtildeerangle(e_0))=langle a_1circtildee,a_2circtildeeranglecirc x_1(d_0),$$ and similarly with $t$ and $x_2$. With these equalities it should be easy to check.
edited Sep 7 at 4:17
answered Sep 3 at 22:23
Malice Vidrine
5,55921021
5,55921021
Thank you for answering. I understood the uniqueness of morphism $f: C to P$.
â konyonyo
Sep 7 at 1:49
But I feel difficult to prove the existance of $f$. I think that $<a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>(e)$ is an element of $P$, and that $<a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>$ is a morphism $C to P$. But you are saying that $<a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>$ is the unique morphism $A to P$. I am thinking about this difference.
â konyonyo
Sep 7 at 2:04
@konyonyo - That should fix the mistake, and also give you a much stronger lead on confirming the existence of the relevant morphism.
â Malice Vidrine
Sep 7 at 4:24
$f$ is a map such that $e mapsto <a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>(e_0)$, and $d mapsto <a_1 circ tilded, a_2 circ tilded>(d_0)$. It is needed to show that $f$ is a morphism of graphs, i.e. that $s_P(<a_1circ tildee,a_2circtildee>(e_0))=<a_1circtildes_C(e),a_2circtildes_C(e)>(d_0)$ and similar equation for $t_P$. I assigned $tildes_C(e)=tildeecirc x_1$ to the right hand side of the equation. And right hand side of it becomes $<a_1circtildeecirc x_1, a_2circtildeecirc x_1>(d_0)=<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$.
â konyonyo
Sep 8 at 5:03
Then $<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$ is equal to $s_P(<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>(e_0))$.
â konyonyo
Sep 8 at 5:08
 |Â
show 2 more comments
Thank you for answering. I understood the uniqueness of morphism $f: C to P$.
â konyonyo
Sep 7 at 1:49
But I feel difficult to prove the existance of $f$. I think that $<a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>(e)$ is an element of $P$, and that $<a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>$ is a morphism $C to P$. But you are saying that $<a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>$ is the unique morphism $A to P$. I am thinking about this difference.
â konyonyo
Sep 7 at 2:04
@konyonyo - That should fix the mistake, and also give you a much stronger lead on confirming the existence of the relevant morphism.
â Malice Vidrine
Sep 7 at 4:24
$f$ is a map such that $e mapsto <a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>(e_0)$, and $d mapsto <a_1 circ tilded, a_2 circ tilded>(d_0)$. It is needed to show that $f$ is a morphism of graphs, i.e. that $s_P(<a_1circ tildee,a_2circtildee>(e_0))=<a_1circtildes_C(e),a_2circtildes_C(e)>(d_0)$ and similar equation for $t_P$. I assigned $tildes_C(e)=tildeecirc x_1$ to the right hand side of the equation. And right hand side of it becomes $<a_1circtildeecirc x_1, a_2circtildeecirc x_1>(d_0)=<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$.
â konyonyo
Sep 8 at 5:03
Then $<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$ is equal to $s_P(<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>(e_0))$.
â konyonyo
Sep 8 at 5:08
Thank you for answering. I understood the uniqueness of morphism $f: C to P$.
â konyonyo
Sep 7 at 1:49
Thank you for answering. I understood the uniqueness of morphism $f: C to P$.
â konyonyo
Sep 7 at 1:49
But I feel difficult to prove the existance of $f$. I think that $<a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>(e)$ is an element of $P$, and that $<a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>$ is a morphism $C to P$. But you are saying that $<a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>$ is the unique morphism $A to P$. I am thinking about this difference.
â konyonyo
Sep 7 at 2:04
But I feel difficult to prove the existance of $f$. I think that $<a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>(e)$ is an element of $P$, and that $<a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>$ is a morphism $C to P$. But you are saying that $<a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>$ is the unique morphism $A to P$. I am thinking about this difference.
â konyonyo
Sep 7 at 2:04
@konyonyo - That should fix the mistake, and also give you a much stronger lead on confirming the existence of the relevant morphism.
â Malice Vidrine
Sep 7 at 4:24
@konyonyo - That should fix the mistake, and also give you a much stronger lead on confirming the existence of the relevant morphism.
â Malice Vidrine
Sep 7 at 4:24
$f$ is a map such that $e mapsto <a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>(e_0)$, and $d mapsto <a_1 circ tilded, a_2 circ tilded>(d_0)$. It is needed to show that $f$ is a morphism of graphs, i.e. that $s_P(<a_1circ tildee,a_2circtildee>(e_0))=<a_1circtildes_C(e),a_2circtildes_C(e)>(d_0)$ and similar equation for $t_P$. I assigned $tildes_C(e)=tildeecirc x_1$ to the right hand side of the equation. And right hand side of it becomes $<a_1circtildeecirc x_1, a_2circtildeecirc x_1>(d_0)=<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$.
â konyonyo
Sep 8 at 5:03
$f$ is a map such that $e mapsto <a_1 circ tildee, a_2 circ tildee>(e_0)$, and $d mapsto <a_1 circ tilded, a_2 circ tilded>(d_0)$. It is needed to show that $f$ is a morphism of graphs, i.e. that $s_P(<a_1circ tildee,a_2circtildee>(e_0))=<a_1circtildes_C(e),a_2circtildes_C(e)>(d_0)$ and similar equation for $t_P$. I assigned $tildes_C(e)=tildeecirc x_1$ to the right hand side of the equation. And right hand side of it becomes $<a_1circtildeecirc x_1, a_2circtildeecirc x_1>(d_0)=<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$.
â konyonyo
Sep 8 at 5:03
Then $<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$ is equal to $s_P(<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>(e_0))$.
â konyonyo
Sep 8 at 5:08
Then $<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$ is equal to $s_P(<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>(e_0))$.
â konyonyo
Sep 8 at 5:08
 |Â
show 2 more comments
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2903880%2fexercise-about-product-of-graphs-in-conceptual-mathematics%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Welcome to MathStackExchange. It is generally recommended to avoid pointing to images with texts and prints from books, and rather retype everything here. This helps this site to become more self-contained, and shows some work. It is also good practice to re-state the problem in your own words (as it's helpful on its own, and may reveals where your lack of understanding is). If you've made any attempt on solving the exercise, it is also kind of you to post it here. Please note you can edit your question anytime.
â Mefitico
Sep 3 at 14:08