3.4. Local Objects
Definition 3.4.1. (a) A non initial
object X is called local
if non initial strong subjects of X has a non initial intersection
M.
(b) An epic simple fraction
of an integral object X is called a generic
residue of X.
(c) A mono (or subject) p: P ®
X is called a residue
of X if P ® p+1(P)
is a generic residue of p+1(P).
Proposition 3.4.2. Suppose X
is a local object with the strong subject M as above.
(a) M is the unique simple
prime of X.
(b) Any proper fraction U of X is disjoint with M.
(c) The inclusion M ® X
is a local map.
Proof. (a) Since M is the smallest strong subject of X,
and any non initial strong subject V of M is also a strong
subject of X, we must have V = M, i.e. M is simple.
Any other simple strong subject P of X must contain M
as the non initial simple prime, thus M = P.
(b) Consider a proper fraction U of X. There is a non
initial strong subject V that is disjoint with U by (3.3.2.d).
Since M Í V, M is
disjoint with U.
(c) M is contained in any non initial strong subject of X,
thus the inclusion M ® X is
local. ––n
Proposition 3.4.3. Suppose f:
Y ® X is a map and Y is
a local object with the simple prime M.
(a) f is disjoint with a strong subject V of X
if the induced map M ® X does
not factor through V.
(b) Suppose Y is simple. Then f is disjoint with a fraction
U of X if it does not factor through U.
(c) f factors through a fraction U of X if the
induced map M ® X is not disjoint
with U.
(d) Suppose {Ui} is an analytic cover on X.
Then f factors through some Ui.
Proof. (a) If the induced map M ®
X does not factor through V then f-1(V)
is a proper strong subject not containing M. Since Y is local
this means that f-1(V) is initial. Thus f
is disjoint with V. The other direction is trivial.
(b) If f does not factor through V then f-1(V)
is a proper fraction of Y, therefore it is initial because any simple
object is quasi simple by (3.3.8). Thus
f is disjoint with V. The other direction is trivial.
(c) If M ® X is not disjoint
with U then it factors through U by (b). Thus f-1(U)
is a fraction contains M, therefore f-1(U)
= Y as M ® Y is quasi
local by (3.4.2) and (3.3.4.a).
It follows that f factors through U. The other direction
is trivial.
(d) If {Ui} is an analytic cover on X, the
induced map M ® X is not disjoint
with at least one Ui, thus by (b) M ®
X factors through Ui, and hence f factors
through Ui by (c). n
Proposition 3.4.4. (a) Any simple fraction
is a residue.
(b) Any simple prime is a residue.
(c) The unique simple prime of a local object is a residue.
(d) Any residue of an object is a maximal simple subject (i.e. it is
not contained in any other simple subject).
(e) Any integral object has at most one generic residue, which is the
intersection of all the non initial fractions; any generic residue is a
generic subject in the sense of (3.3.4.b).
(f) Any two distinct residues of an object are disjoint with each other.
Proof. (a) Suppose P is a simple fraction of an object
X. The epic map P ® p+1(P)
is also fractional by (3.3.2.b), thus P
is a residue.
(b) is obvious and (c) follows from (b).
(d) Suppose q: Q ®
X is a simple object which contains a residue p: P ®
X. Since P ® Q is epic,
by the uniqueness of epi-strong-mono factorization we have p+1(P)
= q+1(Q), so Q Í
f+1(P). Now P ®
p+1(P) is a fraction implies that P ®
Q is fractional by (3.3.2.f). But Q
has exactly two fractions, so P = Q as desired.
(e) Suppose P is a generic residue and Q is a non initial
fraction of an integral object X . Then P Ç
Q is a non initial fraction of P, so P = P Ç
Q as P has exactly two fractions. Thus P is the intersection
of all the non initial fractions of X, therefore is unique. This
also shows that P ® X is a
generic map.
(f) Suppose P and Q are two residues of X and
P Ç Q is non initial. Since
P Ç Q ®
P and P Ç Q ®
Q are epic, P Ç Q,
P and Q have the same strong image V in X.
Since P and Q are both generic residues of V, we have
P = Q by (e). n
Proposition 3.4.5. Suppose p:
P ® U is a residue and u:
U ® X is a fraction (resp. strong
mono). Then u°p:
P ® U is a residue of X.
Proof. t: P ®
p+1(P) is an epic fraction as p is a residue. By (3.3.2.b)
s: p+1(P) ® u+1(p+1(P))
is an epic fraction. Thus s°l
t: P ® (u°p)+1(P)
is an epic fraction. This shows that the mono u°p:
P ® X is a residue. The assertion
for strong monos is obvious by the definition of a residue. n
Proposition 3.4.6. Suppose f:
P ® Z is a local map with P
simple. Then Z is local and f+1(P) is the
simple prime of Z.
Proof. Since f is local, any non initial strong subject
V of Z is not disjoint with f. Thus f factors
through V by (3.4.3.b). Hence V contains
f+1(P). It follows that f+1(P)
is the intersection of non initial strong subject of X. Thus X
is local with f+1(P) as the simple prime. n
Proposition 3.4.7. (a) Suppose f:
X ® Z is a local map and X
is local with the simple prime P. Then Z is local with f+1(P)
as the simple prime.
(b) Suppose f: Y ®
X is a map of local objects. Then f is local iff f+1
sends the simple prime of Y to that of X.
Proof. (a) Let M be the simple prime of X. The
composite of M ® X with X
® Z is a local map (as M ®
X is local by (3.4.2.c)), the assertion follows
from (3.4.6).
(b) The condition is necessary by (a). The other direction is obvious.
n
Proposition 3.4.8. Suppose f:
P ® X is a map and P is
simple.
(a) f is a local epi if X is simple.
(b) f is a local strong mono if X is local with the simple
prime P.
(c) f is an epic fraction if X is integral with the generic
residue P.
Proof. (a) If f is a local epi then X is local
and f+1(P) = X as the simple prime of X
by (3.4.6), so X is simple. The other direction
is obvious.
(b) If f is a local strong mono then X is local with
f+1(P) = P as the simple prime by (3.4.6).
The other direction follows from (3.4.2).
(c) is obvious. n
Proposition 3.4.9. Suppose A
is locally
disjunctable reducible.
(a) Suppose f: P ®
Z is a prelocal map with P simple. Then f is a local
map; Z is a local object with f+1(P) as
the simple prime of Z.
(b) Suppose f: X ®
Z is a prelocal map and X is local. Then f is a local
map and Z is a local object.
Proof. (a) By (3.4.6) it suffices to prove
that f is local. Assume v: V ®
Z is a strong subject and f is disjoint with V. Since
A is locally disjunctable, v is the
intersection of a set {vi: Vi ®
Z} of disjunctable strong monos. Then by (3.1.10)
we have ØØ{(vi)c}
= Øv. Since f Î
Øv, f is not disjoint with
some vic, so f factor through the proper
analytic fraction vic by (3.4.3.b).
Since f is prelocal, we have (Vi)c
= X. Since (Vi)c is disjoint with
V, V is initial. This shows that f is local.
(b) Let M be the simple prime of X. The composite t:
M ® Z of M ®
X with X ® Z is a local
map (as M ® X is local by
(3.4.2.c)), so t is local and Z is a
local object with t+1(M) as the simple prime by
(a). Any non initial strong subject of Z contains t+1(M).
Thus f is not disjoint with any non initial strong subject of Z.
This shows that f is local. n
Definition 3.4.10. (a) A non initial
object X is called c-primary
(resp. f-primary) if any non initial
coflat map (resp. fraction) to X is epic.
(b) A non initial object X is called c-quasi-primary
(resp. f-quasi-primary) if the intersection
of any two non initial coflat maps (resp. fractions) to X is not
initial.
(c) A reduced and c-primary (resp. f-primary) object is called a c-integral
object (resp. f-integral object).
Proposition 3.4.11. (a) Any quotient
of a c-primary (resp. f-primary) object is c-primary (resp. f-primary).
(b) Any c-primary object is c-quasi-primary; any f-primary object is
f-quasi-primary.
(c) Any c-primary object is f-primary; any f-primary object is primary.
(d) Any c-quasi-primary object is f-quasi-primary; any f-quasi-primary
object is quasi-primary.
(e) Any c-integral object is f-integral; any f-integral object is integral.
(f) Any simple object is c-integral; any quotient of a simple object
is c-integral.
(g) Any quasi simple object is f-primary; any quotient of a quasi simple
object is f-primary.
(h) Assume A is locally disjunctable reducible.
Any presimple object is quasi simple. Any quotient of a presimple object
is f-primary.
(i) Assume A is locally disjunctable. A
non initial reduced object X is f-primary if it is c-quasi-primary.
Proof. The proof for (a) and (b) is similar to that of (3.2.2.)
(c) - (e) are obvious.
(f) The first assertion is obvious; the second follows from (a).
(g) The first assertion is trivial; the second follows from (a).
(h) follows from by (3.3.10) and (g).
(i) follows from (3.2.5). n
[Next Section][Content][References][Notations][Home]
|