Universal Property - Formal Definition

Formal Definition

Suppose that U: DC is a functor from a category D to a category C, and let X be an object of C. Consider the following dual (opposite) notions:

An initial morphism from X to U is an initial object in the category of morphisms from X to U. In other words, it consists of a pair (A, φ) where A is an object of D and φ: XU(A) is a morphism in C, such that the following initial property is satisfied:

  • Whenever Y is an object of D and f: XU(Y) is a morphism in C, then there exists a unique morphism g: AY such that the following diagram commutes:

A terminal morphism from U to X is a terminal object in the comma category of morphisms from U to X. In other words, it consists of a pair (A, φ) where A is an object of D and φ: U(A) → X is a morphism in C, such that the following terminal property is satisfied:

  • Whenever Y is an object of D and f: U(Y) → X is a morphism in C, then there exists a unique morphism g: YA such that the following diagram commutes:

The term universal morphism refers either to an initial morphism or a terminal morphism, and the term universal property refers either to an initial property or a terminal property. In each definition, the existence of the morphism g intuitively expresses the fact that (A, φ) is "general enough", while the uniqueness of the morphism ensures that (A, φ) is "not too general".

Read more about this topic:  Universal Property

Famous quotes containing the words formal and/or definition:

    This is no argument against teaching manners to the young. On the contrary, it is a fine old tradition that ought to be resurrected from its current mothballs and put to work...In fact, children are much more comfortable when they know the guide rules for handling the social amenities. It’s no more fun for a child to be introduced to a strange adult and have no idea what to say or do than it is for a grownup to go to a formal dinner and have no idea what fork to use.
    Leontine Young (20th century)

    The physicians say, they are not materialists; but they are:MSpirit is matter reduced to an extreme thinness: O so thin!—But the definition of spiritual should be, that which is its own evidence. What notions do they attach to love! what to religion! One would not willingly pronounce these words in their hearing, and give them the occasion to profane them.
    Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803–1882)