Equivalent Formulations
At first glance cones seem to be slightly abnormal constructions in category theory. They are maps from an object to a functor (or vice-versa). In keeping with the spirit of category theory we would like to define them as morphisms or objects in some suitable category. In fact, we can do both.
Let J be a small category and let CJ be the category of diagrams of type J in C (this is nothing more than a functor category). Define the diagonal functor Δ : C → CJ as follows: Δ(N) : J → C is the constant functor to N for all N in C.
If F is a diagram of type J in C, the following statements are equivalent:
- ψ is a cone from N to F
- ψ is a natural transformation from Δ(N) to F
- (N, ψ) is an object in the comma category (Δ ↓ F)
The dual statements are also equivalent:
- ψ is a co-cone from F to N
- ψ is a natural transformation from F to Δ(N)
- (N, ψ) is an object in the comma category (F ↓ Δ)
These statements can all be verified by a straightforward application of the definitions. Thinking of cones as natural transformations we see that they are just morphisms in CJ with source (or target) a constant functor.
Read more about this topic: Cone (category Theory)
Famous quotes containing the word equivalent:
“For some men the power to destroy life becomes the equivalent to the female power to create life.”
—Myriam Miedzian, U.S. author. Boys Will Be Boys, ch. 4 (1991)