Kernel (category Theory) - Definition

Definition

Let C be a category. In order to define a kernel in the general category-theoretical sense, C needs to have zero morphisms. In that case, if f : XY is an arbitrary morphism in C, then a kernel of f is an equaliser of f and the zero morphism from X to Y. In symbols:

ker(f) = eq(f, 0XY)

To be more explicit, the following universal property can be used. A kernel of f is any morphism k : KX such that:

  • f k is the zero morphism from K to Y;
  • Given any morphism k′ : K′ → X such that f k′ is the zero morphism, there is a unique morphism u : K′ → K such that k u = k'.

Note that in many concrete contexts, one would refer to the object K as the "kernel", rather than the morphism k. In those situations, K would be a subset of X, and that would be sufficient to reconstruct k as an inclusion map; in the nonconcrete case, in contrast, we need the morphism k to describe how K is to be interpreted as a subobject of X. In any case, one can show that k is always a monomorphism (in the categorical sense of the word). One may prefer to think of the kernel as the pair (K,k) rather than as simply K or k alone.

Not every morphism needs to have a kernel, but if it does, then all its kernels are isomorphic in a strong sense: if k : KX and l : LX are kernels of f : XY, then there exists a unique isomorphism φ : KL such that l o φ = k.

Read more about this topic:  Kernel (category Theory)

Famous quotes containing the word definition:

    It is very hard to give a just definition of love. The most we can say of it is this: that in the soul, it is a desire to rule; in the spirit, it is a sympathy; and in the body, it is but a hidden and subtle desire to possess—after many mysteries—what one loves.
    François, Duc De La Rochefoucauld (1613–1680)

    The man who knows governments most completely is he who troubles himself least about a definition which shall give their essence. Enjoying an intimate acquaintance with all their particularities in turn, he would naturally regard an abstract conception in which these were unified as a thing more misleading than enlightening.
    William James (1842–1910)

    Scientific method is the way to truth, but it affords, even in
    principle, no unique definition of truth. Any so-called pragmatic
    definition of truth is doomed to failure equally.
    Willard Van Orman Quine (b. 1908)