Exercise about product of graphs in “Conceptual Mathematics”

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash 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".



enter image description here



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?



enter image description here










share|cite|improve this question























  • 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.
    – Mefitico
    Sep 3 at 14:08














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".



enter image description here



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?



enter image description here










share|cite|improve this question























  • 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.
    – Mefitico
    Sep 3 at 14:08












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".



enter image description here



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?



enter image description here










share|cite|improve this question















Please tell me how to solve the following exercise which is in the book "Conceptual Mathematics A first introduction to categories Second Edition".



enter image description here



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?



enter image description here







category-theory






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








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.
    – 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.
    – 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.
– 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.
– Mefitico
Sep 3 at 14:08










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.






share|cite|improve this answer






















  • Thank you for answering. I understood the uniqueness of morphism $f: C to P$.
    – 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.
    – 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.
    – 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 $<a_1circtildeecirc x_1, a_2circtildeecirc x_1>(d_0)=<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$.
    – konyonyo
    Sep 8 at 5:03











  • Then $<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$ is equal to $s_P(<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>(e_0))$.
    – konyonyo
    Sep 8 at 5:08










Your Answer




StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: false,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













 

draft saved


draft discarded


















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






























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.






share|cite|improve this answer






















  • Thank you for answering. I understood the uniqueness of morphism $f: C to P$.
    – 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.
    – 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.
    – 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 $<a_1circtildeecirc x_1, a_2circtildeecirc x_1>(d_0)=<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$.
    – konyonyo
    Sep 8 at 5:03











  • Then $<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$ is equal to $s_P(<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>(e_0))$.
    – konyonyo
    Sep 8 at 5:08














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.






share|cite|improve this answer






















  • Thank you for answering. I understood the uniqueness of morphism $f: C to P$.
    – 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.
    – 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.
    – 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 $<a_1circtildeecirc x_1, a_2circtildeecirc x_1>(d_0)=<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$.
    – konyonyo
    Sep 8 at 5:03











  • Then $<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$ is equal to $s_P(<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>(e_0))$.
    – konyonyo
    Sep 8 at 5:08












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.






share|cite|improve this answer














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.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








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 $f: C to P$.
    – 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.
    – 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.
    – 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 $<a_1circtildeecirc x_1, a_2circtildeecirc x_1>(d_0)=<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$.
    – konyonyo
    Sep 8 at 5:03











  • Then $<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$ is equal to $s_P(<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>(e_0))$.
    – konyonyo
    Sep 8 at 5:08
















  • Thank you for answering. I understood the uniqueness of morphism $f: C to P$.
    – 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.
    – 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.
    – 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 $<a_1circtildeecirc x_1, a_2circtildeecirc x_1>(d_0)=<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$.
    – konyonyo
    Sep 8 at 5:03











  • Then $<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$ is equal to $s_P(<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>(e_0))$.
    – konyonyo
    Sep 8 at 5:08















Thank you for answering. I understood the uniqueness of morphism $f: C to P$.
– konyonyo
Sep 7 at 1:49




Thank you for answering. I understood the uniqueness of morphism $f: C to P$.
– 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.
– 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.
– 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.
– 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.
– 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 $<a_1circtildeecirc x_1, a_2circtildeecirc x_1>(d_0)=<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$.
– 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 $<a_1circtildeecirc x_1, a_2circtildeecirc x_1>(d_0)=<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$.
– konyonyo
Sep 8 at 5:03













Then $<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$ is equal to $s_P(<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>(e_0))$.
– konyonyo
Sep 8 at 5:08




Then $<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>circ x_1(d_0)$ is equal to $s_P(<a_1circtildee,a_2circtildee>(e_0))$.
– konyonyo
Sep 8 at 5:08

















 

draft saved


draft discarded















































 


draft saved


draft discarded














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













































































這個網誌中的熱門文章

How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

Mutual Information Always Non-negative

Why am i infinitely getting the same tweet with the Twitter Search API?