4.2. Coherent Analytic Categories
Definition 4.2.1. A category is coherent
if it salsifies the following conditions:
(a) It is locally
finitely copresentable.
(b) Finite sums are stable disjoint.
(c) The sum of the terminal object with itself is finitely
copresentable.
A category is a coherent analytic category iff its opposite
is a locally
indecomposable category in the sense of Diers
[1986]. A locally finitely copresentable category
is a coherent analytic category iff its full subcategory of finitely copresentable
objects is lextensive. This was proved by Diers in [Diers
1983] in the dual situation.
Example 4.2.1.1. (see [Johnstone,
1982]) Recall that an open subset is quasi-compactif
every open cover has a finite subcover (note that in [Johnstone
1982] quasi-compact open subset is simply called compact).
If X is a topological space we denote by c(X)
the family of quasi-compact open subsets of X, then c(X)
is closed under finite unions. A sober topological space X is coherentif c(X)
is closed under finite intersection (this is equivalent to that c(X)
is a distributive lattice), and forms a base for the topology on
the space. A continuous mapping f: X --> Y of two coherent
spaces is called coherent
if f-1(U) is quasi-compact for any quasi-compact
open subset U of Y. A coherent space X is uniquely
determined by the distributive lattice c(X).
In fact, according to Stone's representation theorem for distributive lattices,
the category of coherent spaces CohSp is dual to the category of
distributive lattices DLat. Since DLat is locally finitely
presentable (in fact, finitary algebraic), CohSp is locally finitely
copresentable. Clearly finite sums in CohSp are stable disjoint
and the space of two points is finitely copresentable, thus CohSp
= DLatop is a coherent analytic category.
Suppose A is a coherent analytic category.
Proposition 4.2.2. (a) A
is a spatial analytic category.
(b) The initial object 0 is finitely copresentable.
(c) The initial subobject 0 --> X of any subobject X
is finitely cogenerated.
(d) Any non-initial object has a simple (resp. an extremal simple)
strong subobject.
(e) Any analytic cover of an object has a finite analytic subcover.
(f) Any monic divisor on A is spatial.
Proof. (a) A coherent analytic category is a perfect analytic
category by (4.1.2). It is spatial by the
assertion (d) and (2.6.5.a).
(b) The initial object 0 is the kernel of the injections 1
--> 1 + 1. Since 1 and 1 + 1 are finitely copresentable,
and the full subcategory of finitely copresentable objects is closed under
finite limits by (4.1.2.c), it follows
that 0 is also finitely copresentable.
(c) Suppose 0 is the intersection of a collection ui:
Ui --> X of strong subobjects. Let vj:
Vj --> X be the collection of finite intersections of ui.
Then 0 is the cofiltered limit of {vj}. Since
0
is finitely copresentable, the identity 0 --> 0 factors through
some 0 --> vj in some map vj --> 0.
Since 0 is a strict initial, this implies that vj
= 0. This shows that 0 is a finitely cogenerated subobject by
(4.1.4).
(d) Consider a non-initial object
X. Let S* be the set
of non-initial strong subobject of X. It is non-empty. A strong
subobject of X is simple iff it is a minimal element of S*.
Let C be a chain in S*. Let us assume that the intersection
of subobjects in C is 0. Since 0 is finitely cogenerated
by (c), there is a finite subset C0 of C whose
intersection is 0 by (4.1.4). But
the intersection of C0 is an element of C. We
obtain a contradiction. By Zorn's lemma, S* has a minimal element,
which is a simple object. The proof for the case of extremal simple objects
is similar.
(e) Suppose {Vi} is a set of disjunctable strong
subobjects such that {(Vi)c| i I}
is an analytic cover for X. Let V be the intersection of
these {Vi}. Then by (3.1.10)
we have X = data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/40d84/40d844afc788b9ae61813ef8be757423e306657c" alt="" {(Vi)c}
= V, so V = 0. By
(c) there is a finite subset J
I such that {Vi| i J}
has intersection 0. Applying (3.1.10)
again we see that {(Vi)c} is a finite
analytic cover for X.
(f) follows from (d) and (2.6.5.a)
because the locale of any extremal simple object for any monic divisor
is 2 (i.e. the locale of one-point-space).
Proposition 4.2.3. (a) Cofiltered limits
and products of coflat maps are coflat.
(b) Intersections of coflat monos are coflat monos.
(c) Intersections of fractions are fractions.
(d) Intersections of epic fractions are epic fractions.
Proof. (a) Consider a cofiltered diagram of coflat maps (fi:
Xi --> Yi | i
I}, whose limit is f: X --> Y with the projections (si:
X --> Xi, ti: Y --> Yi}. For
any i I let
fi':
Xi' --> Y be the pullback of fi
along ti. Then f is a cofiltered limit of {fi'}.
Let m: (U, u) --> (V, v) be an epi in
A/Y. Denote the pullback of m
along fi' by mi':(Ui,
xi) --> (Vi, vi) and
the pullback of m along f by m':(U', u')
--> (Y', y'). As pullbacks commute with limits, m
is the limit of {m'}. As fi' is coflat and m
is epic, each mi' is epic. Since any cofiltered limit
of epis is epic in a locally finitely copresentable category, m'
is epic (cf. [Adamek and Rosicky 1994]). As a
result, f is coflat. The second assertion follows from the fact
that a product of coflat maps is a cofiltered limit of finite products
of coflat maps, therefore is coflat.
(b) follows from (a).
(c) Since any intersection of normal monos is normal, the assertion
follows from (b).
(d) First in an analytic category any finite intersection of epic coflat
monos is epic (as it is the pullback of an epi along coflat maps). Since
an arbitrary intersection is a cofiltered intersection of finite intersections,
and any cofiltered limit of epis is epic (in a locally finitely copresentable
category), it follows from (c) that the intersection of epic fractions
is epic.
Definition 4.2.4. (a) An object is rationally
closed if any epic fraction to it is an isomorphism.
(b) An object is analytically
closed if any epic analytic mono to it is an isomorphism.
Proposition 4.2.5. (a) Any object X
has a unique rationally closed epic fraction R(X).
(b) Any object X has a unique analytically closed epic preanalytic
fraction Q(X).
(c} Any quasi-primary objectX
has a unique generic quasi-simple
fraction P(X).
Proof. (a) The intersection of epic fractions of an object X
is an epic fraction R(X) by (4.2.3.d).
Since any composition of epic fractions is an epic fraction, clearly R(X)
is rationally closed. Any rationally closed epic fraction of X must
be the intersection of all the epic fractions of X, thus is unique.
(b) The intersection of epic preanalytic fractions of an object X
is an epic preanalytic fraction Q(X) by (4.2.5.e).
Since any composition of epic preanalytic fractions is an epic preanalytic
fraction, clearly Q(X) is analytically closed. Any analytically
closed epic fraction of X must be the intersection of all the epic
preanalytic fractions of X, thus is unique.
(c) The intersection of any two non-initial fractions of a quasi-primary
object X is non-initial by (3.5.8).
Thus the intersection of all the non-initial fractions of X is a
non-initial fraction P(X) because 0 is finitely copresentable.
Clearly P(X) is generic. Since any composition of fractions
is a fraction, clearly P(X) is quasi-simple. Any quasi-simple
fraction of X must be the intersection of all the fractions of X,
thus is unique.
Definition 4.2.6. (a) The unique rationally
closed epic fraction R(X) of an object X is called
the rational
hull of X.
(b) The unique analytically closed epic preanalytic fraction Q(X)
of an object X is called the called the analytic
hull of X.
(c) The unique quasi-simple fraction P(X) of a quasi-primary
object X is called the fractional
hull of X.
Recall that a map to an object X is called prelocal
if it does not factor through any proper analytic mono to X.
Definition 4.2.7. A preanalytic
mono is a map such that any of its pullbacks is not proper prelocal.
Proposition 4.2.8. (a) Any preanalytic
mono is a mono; any analytic mono is preanalytic.
(b) An prelocal preanalytic mono is an isomorphism.
(c) Any pullback of a preanalytic mono is a preanalytic mono.
(d) Any composite of preanalytic monos is a preanalytic mono.
(e) Any intersection of preanalytic monos is a preanalytic mono.
(d) Any non-isomorphic preanalytic mono factors through a non-isomorphic
analytic mono.
(e) A map is not prelocal iff it factors through a non-isomorphic preanalytic
mono.
Proof. Similar to (1.1.2) and
(1.1.3).
Proposition 4.2.9. (a) The class of
preanalytic mono is the smallest class of monos containing the class of
analytic monos which is closed under composition and arbitrary intersection.
(b} Any preanalytic mono is a fraction.
Proof. (a) Consider a class S of monos which is closed
under composition and intersection. Assume S contains the class
of analytic monos. We prove that S contains the class of preanalytic
monos. Consider a preanalytic mono u: U --> X. Let v:
V --> X be the intersection of all the monos to X in S
through which u factors. Then v is a mono in S through
which u factors in the form u = ve therough a mono e:
U
--> V. If w is an analytic mono to V through which
e
factors, then vw is a mono in S through which u factors.
Since by assumption v is the intersection of such monos,
vw
factors through v. Thus w is an isomorphism, which means
that e is a prelocal map. But u: U --> X is preanalytic
implies that e: U --> V is preanalytic by (4.2.8.c),
thus e is an isomorphism by (4.2.8.b). Since
v
is in S, the relation u = ve implies that u
is in S.
(b) The class of coflat (resp. normal) monos is closed under composition
and intersection and any analytic mono is coflat. By (a) these two classes
of maps contain the class of preanalytic monos. Thus any preanalytic mono
is coflat and normal.
Remark 4.2.9. Suppose f: Y --> X is a map. If f
= gl with l: Y --> Z a quasi-local (resp. prelocal) map
and g: Z --> X a fraction (resp. analytic mono), then we
say that (l, g) is a quasi-local-fraction
(resp. prelocal-preanalytic)
factorization
of f, and Z is the quasi-local
(resp. prelocal)
image of Y in X. It is easy
to see that g is the intersection of all the fractions (resp. presingular
monos) to X such that f factors, thus such a factorization
is unique. As in the case of epi-strong-mono factorization, quasi-local-fraction
factorizations and prelocal-presingular factorizations exist because these
classes of monos are closed under composition and intersection.
[Next Section][Content][References][Notations][Home]
|