Categorical Unification of Jordan Holder TheoremsA categorical questionInfinite Tensor ProductsJordan Hölder...
Categorical Unification of Jordan Holder Theorems
A categorical questionInfinite Tensor ProductsJordan Hölder decomposition for group objectsWhat is known about higher-categorical reconstruction theorems? (reference request)Categorical Invariants Are semi-direct products categorical (co)limits?A categorical framework for Freiman s-morphismsHigher categorical analogue of concretenessCategorical nomenclatureJordan-Hölder-like statements for modules with $Delta$-filtrations over a quasihereditary algebra
$begingroup$
In addition to the Jordan-Holder theorem for groups, there are various Jordan-Holder Theorems for other categories:
Finite dimensional representations have filtrations whose associated graded consists of irreducible representations. Any other such associated graded is the same up to permutation of its elements.
Artinian modules have filtrations whose associated graded consists of simple modules. Any other such associated graded is the same up to permutation of its elements.
Finitely generated $A$-modules have filtrations whose associated graded consists of modules of the form $A / p$ for a prime $p$. Any other such associated graded is the same up to permutation of its elements.
There is a commonality to the proofs of these as well. I am wondering if someone has come up with a categorical version of the Jordan-Holder theorem, which in a sense encompasses these ones.
For instance, one might try to look at the category of subquotients $text{SubQuot}(X)$ of an object $X$ in a category $C$. Objects in this category are pairs $(Z, Y)$ with $Y in text{Quot}(X)$ and $Z in text{Sub}(Y)$. Morphisms $f : (Y, Z) rightarrow (Y', Z')$ are pairs of maps $Y twoheadrightarrow Y'$ in $text{Quot}(X)$ and $Z' rightarrow text{im}(Z rightarrow Y rightarrow Y')$ in $text{Sub}(Y')$.
Say a filtration is then a sequences of subquotients $(Y_i, Z_i)$ where $0 rightarrow Z_i rightarrow Y_i rightarrow Y_{i+1} rightarrow 0$ is exact. Say a simple object is one without nontrivial quotient objects.
We can represent a pair $(Z, Y)$ with $(Z_X, Y)$, where $Z_X$ is the pullback of $Z rightarrow Y$ along $X rightarrow Y$. To construct the coproduct $(Y, Z) amalg (Y', Z')$ of $(Y, Z)$ and $(Y', Z')$, we simply take the pushout $Y''$ of $Y$ and $Y'$ in $C$ (coproduct in $text{Quot}(X)$), and the pullback $Z''_X$ of $Z_X$ and $Z'_X$ in $C$ (product in $text{Sub}(X)$). The coproduct is represented by the pair $(Y'', Z''_X)$.
Coproducts can be used to refine filtrations. The Jordan-Holder Theorem for modules then asserts that, for two filtrations ${ (Z_i, Y_i) }_{i = 1}^n$ and ${ (Z_j', Y_j') }_{j = 1}^m$ with simple (no nontrivial quotient objects) subquotients $Z_i$ and $Z_j'$, we can take a mutual refinement ${ (Z_i, Y_i) amalg (Z_j', Y_j') }_{1 leq i leq n, 1 leq j leq m }$. The mutual refinement, after discarding its redundant elements, has the same subquotients as both ${ (Z_i, Y_i) }_{i = 1}^n$ and ${ (Z_j', Y_j') }_{j = 1}^m$, since a filtration by simple subquotients should have only the trivial refinements.
I think this works for groups and modules. However, I am particularly interested to see if anyone can make something like this work for the third example above, which seems harder, because I don't quite see how it fits in with the rest.
gr.group-theory ct.category-theory modules
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In addition to the Jordan-Holder theorem for groups, there are various Jordan-Holder Theorems for other categories:
Finite dimensional representations have filtrations whose associated graded consists of irreducible representations. Any other such associated graded is the same up to permutation of its elements.
Artinian modules have filtrations whose associated graded consists of simple modules. Any other such associated graded is the same up to permutation of its elements.
Finitely generated $A$-modules have filtrations whose associated graded consists of modules of the form $A / p$ for a prime $p$. Any other such associated graded is the same up to permutation of its elements.
There is a commonality to the proofs of these as well. I am wondering if someone has come up with a categorical version of the Jordan-Holder theorem, which in a sense encompasses these ones.
For instance, one might try to look at the category of subquotients $text{SubQuot}(X)$ of an object $X$ in a category $C$. Objects in this category are pairs $(Z, Y)$ with $Y in text{Quot}(X)$ and $Z in text{Sub}(Y)$. Morphisms $f : (Y, Z) rightarrow (Y', Z')$ are pairs of maps $Y twoheadrightarrow Y'$ in $text{Quot}(X)$ and $Z' rightarrow text{im}(Z rightarrow Y rightarrow Y')$ in $text{Sub}(Y')$.
Say a filtration is then a sequences of subquotients $(Y_i, Z_i)$ where $0 rightarrow Z_i rightarrow Y_i rightarrow Y_{i+1} rightarrow 0$ is exact. Say a simple object is one without nontrivial quotient objects.
We can represent a pair $(Z, Y)$ with $(Z_X, Y)$, where $Z_X$ is the pullback of $Z rightarrow Y$ along $X rightarrow Y$. To construct the coproduct $(Y, Z) amalg (Y', Z')$ of $(Y, Z)$ and $(Y', Z')$, we simply take the pushout $Y''$ of $Y$ and $Y'$ in $C$ (coproduct in $text{Quot}(X)$), and the pullback $Z''_X$ of $Z_X$ and $Z'_X$ in $C$ (product in $text{Sub}(X)$). The coproduct is represented by the pair $(Y'', Z''_X)$.
Coproducts can be used to refine filtrations. The Jordan-Holder Theorem for modules then asserts that, for two filtrations ${ (Z_i, Y_i) }_{i = 1}^n$ and ${ (Z_j', Y_j') }_{j = 1}^m$ with simple (no nontrivial quotient objects) subquotients $Z_i$ and $Z_j'$, we can take a mutual refinement ${ (Z_i, Y_i) amalg (Z_j', Y_j') }_{1 leq i leq n, 1 leq j leq m }$. The mutual refinement, after discarding its redundant elements, has the same subquotients as both ${ (Z_i, Y_i) }_{i = 1}^n$ and ${ (Z_j', Y_j') }_{j = 1}^m$, since a filtration by simple subquotients should have only the trivial refinements.
I think this works for groups and modules. However, I am particularly interested to see if anyone can make something like this work for the third example above, which seems harder, because I don't quite see how it fits in with the rest.
gr.group-theory ct.category-theory modules
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I believe many Jordan-Hölder type theorems can be deduced from the version for modular lattices.
$endgroup$
– Benjamin Steinberg
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
That's interesting, Benjamin. Do you think by chance that it could be made to include example 3 above?
$endgroup$
– Dean Young
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
I am not so familiar with example 3 to know if the modular lattice result applies
$endgroup$
– Benjamin Steinberg
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In addition to the Jordan-Holder theorem for groups, there are various Jordan-Holder Theorems for other categories:
Finite dimensional representations have filtrations whose associated graded consists of irreducible representations. Any other such associated graded is the same up to permutation of its elements.
Artinian modules have filtrations whose associated graded consists of simple modules. Any other such associated graded is the same up to permutation of its elements.
Finitely generated $A$-modules have filtrations whose associated graded consists of modules of the form $A / p$ for a prime $p$. Any other such associated graded is the same up to permutation of its elements.
There is a commonality to the proofs of these as well. I am wondering if someone has come up with a categorical version of the Jordan-Holder theorem, which in a sense encompasses these ones.
For instance, one might try to look at the category of subquotients $text{SubQuot}(X)$ of an object $X$ in a category $C$. Objects in this category are pairs $(Z, Y)$ with $Y in text{Quot}(X)$ and $Z in text{Sub}(Y)$. Morphisms $f : (Y, Z) rightarrow (Y', Z')$ are pairs of maps $Y twoheadrightarrow Y'$ in $text{Quot}(X)$ and $Z' rightarrow text{im}(Z rightarrow Y rightarrow Y')$ in $text{Sub}(Y')$.
Say a filtration is then a sequences of subquotients $(Y_i, Z_i)$ where $0 rightarrow Z_i rightarrow Y_i rightarrow Y_{i+1} rightarrow 0$ is exact. Say a simple object is one without nontrivial quotient objects.
We can represent a pair $(Z, Y)$ with $(Z_X, Y)$, where $Z_X$ is the pullback of $Z rightarrow Y$ along $X rightarrow Y$. To construct the coproduct $(Y, Z) amalg (Y', Z')$ of $(Y, Z)$ and $(Y', Z')$, we simply take the pushout $Y''$ of $Y$ and $Y'$ in $C$ (coproduct in $text{Quot}(X)$), and the pullback $Z''_X$ of $Z_X$ and $Z'_X$ in $C$ (product in $text{Sub}(X)$). The coproduct is represented by the pair $(Y'', Z''_X)$.
Coproducts can be used to refine filtrations. The Jordan-Holder Theorem for modules then asserts that, for two filtrations ${ (Z_i, Y_i) }_{i = 1}^n$ and ${ (Z_j', Y_j') }_{j = 1}^m$ with simple (no nontrivial quotient objects) subquotients $Z_i$ and $Z_j'$, we can take a mutual refinement ${ (Z_i, Y_i) amalg (Z_j', Y_j') }_{1 leq i leq n, 1 leq j leq m }$. The mutual refinement, after discarding its redundant elements, has the same subquotients as both ${ (Z_i, Y_i) }_{i = 1}^n$ and ${ (Z_j', Y_j') }_{j = 1}^m$, since a filtration by simple subquotients should have only the trivial refinements.
I think this works for groups and modules. However, I am particularly interested to see if anyone can make something like this work for the third example above, which seems harder, because I don't quite see how it fits in with the rest.
gr.group-theory ct.category-theory modules
$endgroup$
In addition to the Jordan-Holder theorem for groups, there are various Jordan-Holder Theorems for other categories:
Finite dimensional representations have filtrations whose associated graded consists of irreducible representations. Any other such associated graded is the same up to permutation of its elements.
Artinian modules have filtrations whose associated graded consists of simple modules. Any other such associated graded is the same up to permutation of its elements.
Finitely generated $A$-modules have filtrations whose associated graded consists of modules of the form $A / p$ for a prime $p$. Any other such associated graded is the same up to permutation of its elements.
There is a commonality to the proofs of these as well. I am wondering if someone has come up with a categorical version of the Jordan-Holder theorem, which in a sense encompasses these ones.
For instance, one might try to look at the category of subquotients $text{SubQuot}(X)$ of an object $X$ in a category $C$. Objects in this category are pairs $(Z, Y)$ with $Y in text{Quot}(X)$ and $Z in text{Sub}(Y)$. Morphisms $f : (Y, Z) rightarrow (Y', Z')$ are pairs of maps $Y twoheadrightarrow Y'$ in $text{Quot}(X)$ and $Z' rightarrow text{im}(Z rightarrow Y rightarrow Y')$ in $text{Sub}(Y')$.
Say a filtration is then a sequences of subquotients $(Y_i, Z_i)$ where $0 rightarrow Z_i rightarrow Y_i rightarrow Y_{i+1} rightarrow 0$ is exact. Say a simple object is one without nontrivial quotient objects.
We can represent a pair $(Z, Y)$ with $(Z_X, Y)$, where $Z_X$ is the pullback of $Z rightarrow Y$ along $X rightarrow Y$. To construct the coproduct $(Y, Z) amalg (Y', Z')$ of $(Y, Z)$ and $(Y', Z')$, we simply take the pushout $Y''$ of $Y$ and $Y'$ in $C$ (coproduct in $text{Quot}(X)$), and the pullback $Z''_X$ of $Z_X$ and $Z'_X$ in $C$ (product in $text{Sub}(X)$). The coproduct is represented by the pair $(Y'', Z''_X)$.
Coproducts can be used to refine filtrations. The Jordan-Holder Theorem for modules then asserts that, for two filtrations ${ (Z_i, Y_i) }_{i = 1}^n$ and ${ (Z_j', Y_j') }_{j = 1}^m$ with simple (no nontrivial quotient objects) subquotients $Z_i$ and $Z_j'$, we can take a mutual refinement ${ (Z_i, Y_i) amalg (Z_j', Y_j') }_{1 leq i leq n, 1 leq j leq m }$. The mutual refinement, after discarding its redundant elements, has the same subquotients as both ${ (Z_i, Y_i) }_{i = 1}^n$ and ${ (Z_j', Y_j') }_{j = 1}^m$, since a filtration by simple subquotients should have only the trivial refinements.
I think this works for groups and modules. However, I am particularly interested to see if anyone can make something like this work for the third example above, which seems harder, because I don't quite see how it fits in with the rest.
gr.group-theory ct.category-theory modules
gr.group-theory ct.category-theory modules
edited 3 hours ago
Dean Young
asked 11 hours ago
Dean YoungDean Young
728311
728311
$begingroup$
I believe many Jordan-Hölder type theorems can be deduced from the version for modular lattices.
$endgroup$
– Benjamin Steinberg
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
That's interesting, Benjamin. Do you think by chance that it could be made to include example 3 above?
$endgroup$
– Dean Young
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
I am not so familiar with example 3 to know if the modular lattice result applies
$endgroup$
– Benjamin Steinberg
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I believe many Jordan-Hölder type theorems can be deduced from the version for modular lattices.
$endgroup$
– Benjamin Steinberg
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
That's interesting, Benjamin. Do you think by chance that it could be made to include example 3 above?
$endgroup$
– Dean Young
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
I am not so familiar with example 3 to know if the modular lattice result applies
$endgroup$
– Benjamin Steinberg
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I believe many Jordan-Hölder type theorems can be deduced from the version for modular lattices.
$endgroup$
– Benjamin Steinberg
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
I believe many Jordan-Hölder type theorems can be deduced from the version for modular lattices.
$endgroup$
– Benjamin Steinberg
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
That's interesting, Benjamin. Do you think by chance that it could be made to include example 3 above?
$endgroup$
– Dean Young
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
That's interesting, Benjamin. Do you think by chance that it could be made to include example 3 above?
$endgroup$
– Dean Young
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
I am not so familiar with example 3 to know if the modular lattice result applies
$endgroup$
– Benjamin Steinberg
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I am not so familiar with example 3 to know if the modular lattice result applies
$endgroup$
– Benjamin Steinberg
1 hour ago
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
This does not really involve any category theory, but perhaps it is useful to note the following general setting for the Jordan-Hölder theorem.
For $G$ a group and $Omega$ a set, a group with operators is $(G, Omega)$ equipped with an action $Omega times G rightarrow G$: $(omega,g) mapsto g^omega$ such that $(gh)^{omega} = g^{omega} h^{omega}$ for all $omega in Omega$ and $g, h in G$.
See the Wikipedia article for more information about groups with operators: link.
The point is that the Jordan-Hölder theorem holds for a group with operators, and it seems to have most Jordan-Hölder type theorems as a special case. These include for example the Jordan-Hölder theorems for groups and modules over a ring. Also, by taking $Omega = G$ with conjugation action, you get results about chief series and chief factors of $G$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "504"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f324108%2fcategorical-unification-of-jordan-holder-theorems%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
This does not really involve any category theory, but perhaps it is useful to note the following general setting for the Jordan-Hölder theorem.
For $G$ a group and $Omega$ a set, a group with operators is $(G, Omega)$ equipped with an action $Omega times G rightarrow G$: $(omega,g) mapsto g^omega$ such that $(gh)^{omega} = g^{omega} h^{omega}$ for all $omega in Omega$ and $g, h in G$.
See the Wikipedia article for more information about groups with operators: link.
The point is that the Jordan-Hölder theorem holds for a group with operators, and it seems to have most Jordan-Hölder type theorems as a special case. These include for example the Jordan-Hölder theorems for groups and modules over a ring. Also, by taking $Omega = G$ with conjugation action, you get results about chief series and chief factors of $G$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This does not really involve any category theory, but perhaps it is useful to note the following general setting for the Jordan-Hölder theorem.
For $G$ a group and $Omega$ a set, a group with operators is $(G, Omega)$ equipped with an action $Omega times G rightarrow G$: $(omega,g) mapsto g^omega$ such that $(gh)^{omega} = g^{omega} h^{omega}$ for all $omega in Omega$ and $g, h in G$.
See the Wikipedia article for more information about groups with operators: link.
The point is that the Jordan-Hölder theorem holds for a group with operators, and it seems to have most Jordan-Hölder type theorems as a special case. These include for example the Jordan-Hölder theorems for groups and modules over a ring. Also, by taking $Omega = G$ with conjugation action, you get results about chief series and chief factors of $G$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This does not really involve any category theory, but perhaps it is useful to note the following general setting for the Jordan-Hölder theorem.
For $G$ a group and $Omega$ a set, a group with operators is $(G, Omega)$ equipped with an action $Omega times G rightarrow G$: $(omega,g) mapsto g^omega$ such that $(gh)^{omega} = g^{omega} h^{omega}$ for all $omega in Omega$ and $g, h in G$.
See the Wikipedia article for more information about groups with operators: link.
The point is that the Jordan-Hölder theorem holds for a group with operators, and it seems to have most Jordan-Hölder type theorems as a special case. These include for example the Jordan-Hölder theorems for groups and modules over a ring. Also, by taking $Omega = G$ with conjugation action, you get results about chief series and chief factors of $G$.
$endgroup$
This does not really involve any category theory, but perhaps it is useful to note the following general setting for the Jordan-Hölder theorem.
For $G$ a group and $Omega$ a set, a group with operators is $(G, Omega)$ equipped with an action $Omega times G rightarrow G$: $(omega,g) mapsto g^omega$ such that $(gh)^{omega} = g^{omega} h^{omega}$ for all $omega in Omega$ and $g, h in G$.
See the Wikipedia article for more information about groups with operators: link.
The point is that the Jordan-Hölder theorem holds for a group with operators, and it seems to have most Jordan-Hölder type theorems as a special case. These include for example the Jordan-Hölder theorems for groups and modules over a ring. Also, by taking $Omega = G$ with conjugation action, you get results about chief series and chief factors of $G$.
answered 7 hours ago
spinspin
1,0111018
1,0111018
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to MathOverflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f324108%2fcategorical-unification-of-jordan-holder-theorems%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
I believe many Jordan-Hölder type theorems can be deduced from the version for modular lattices.
$endgroup$
– Benjamin Steinberg
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
That's interesting, Benjamin. Do you think by chance that it could be made to include example 3 above?
$endgroup$
– Dean Young
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
I am not so familiar with example 3 to know if the modular lattice result applies
$endgroup$
– Benjamin Steinberg
1 hour ago