- #1
Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
- 3,998
- 48
I am reading Paolo Aluffi's book, Algebra: Chapter 0.
I am currently focused on Chapter I, Section 5: Universal Properties.
I need some help Example 5.3 and Exercise 5.2 in this section.
QUESTION 1Example 5.3 reads as follows:View attachment 4484
Can someone clearly explain why \(\displaystyle \emptyset\) is initial ...
We need every set \(\displaystyle A\) in the category Set to have exactly one morphism (set function):
\(\displaystyle \emptyset \rightarrow A\)
and Aluffi seems to be saying that the 'empty graph' ( an "empty or nothing function" ? ) is the unique function from \(\displaystyle \emptyset\) to \(\displaystyle A\) ... is that right ...?
It seems a highly contrived function (morphism) ... indeed, what is the empty graph exactly ... and how do we rigorously justify the assertion that it is actually a function ...
Can someone please explain clearly just what Aluffi is saying here ... ?
QUESTION 2
Exercise 5.2 in Chapter I, Section 5 reads as follows:View attachment 4485Can someone show me how to construct a rigorous and formal proof for this exercise ... ?Help will be much appreciated ...
PeterPeter
I am currently focused on Chapter I, Section 5: Universal Properties.
I need some help Example 5.3 and Exercise 5.2 in this section.
QUESTION 1Example 5.3 reads as follows:View attachment 4484
Can someone clearly explain why \(\displaystyle \emptyset\) is initial ...
We need every set \(\displaystyle A\) in the category Set to have exactly one morphism (set function):
\(\displaystyle \emptyset \rightarrow A\)
and Aluffi seems to be saying that the 'empty graph' ( an "empty or nothing function" ? ) is the unique function from \(\displaystyle \emptyset\) to \(\displaystyle A\) ... is that right ...?
It seems a highly contrived function (morphism) ... indeed, what is the empty graph exactly ... and how do we rigorously justify the assertion that it is actually a function ...
Can someone please explain clearly just what Aluffi is saying here ... ?
QUESTION 2
Exercise 5.2 in Chapter I, Section 5 reads as follows:View attachment 4485Can someone show me how to construct a rigorous and formal proof for this exercise ... ?Help will be much appreciated ...
PeterPeter
Last edited: