PlanetMath (more info)
 Math for the people, by the people. Sponsor PlanetMath
Encyclopedia | Requests | Forums | Docs | Wiki | Random | RSS  
Login
create new user
name:
pass:
forget your password?
Main Menu
Owner confidence rating: Very high Entry average rating: No information on entry rating
category of sets (Definition)

The category of sets has, as its objects, all sets and, as its morphisms, functions between sets. (This works if a category's objects are only required to be part of a class, as the class of all sets exists.) The category of sets is often denoted by Set.

Alternately one can specify a universe, containing all sets of interest in the situation, and take the category to contain only sets in that universe and functions between those sets.

One of the most famous endofunctors associated with the category of sets is the powerset functor $P$ , which takes every set $A$ to its power set $P(A)$ , and any function $f:A\to B$ to the function $P(f): P(A)\to P(B)$ , given by $$ P(f)(S) := f(S) = \lbrace b\in B\mid b = f(a)\mbox{ for some }a\in S\rbrace. $$ If $f \colon A\to B$ and $g \colon B\to C$ are functions, then $(P(g)\circ P(f))(S) = P(g)(P(f)(S)) = P(g)(f(S))=g(f(S))= (g\circ f)(S)=P(g\circ f)(S)$ , so that $P$ is a covariant functor. This functor may also be defined in an ``arrow theoretic'' fashion as a ${\rm Hom}$ functor. Let $T$ be a set with two elements, for instance $T = \{ \{\}, \{\{\}\}\}$ . (Since, by the definition of cardinality, all sets with the same number of elements are isomorphic in the category of sets, it does not matter which set with two elements we pick as $T$ .) Then define $P(A) = {\rm Hom} (A,T)$ ; likewise, given a function $f \colon A \to B$ , define $P(f) \colon P(B) \to P(A)$ by $P(f)(g) = g \circ f$ .




"category of sets" is owned by rspuzio. [ full author list (3) | owner history (1) ]
(view preamble | get metadata)

View style:

See Also: category, Nicolas Rashevsky, mathematical biology and theoretical biophysics, category of Borel spaces, index of categories

Also defines:  powerset functor

Attachments:
monomorphisms of category of sets (Theorem) by rspuzio
Log in to rate this entry.
(view current ratings)

Cross-references: isomorphic, number, cardinality, covariant functor, power set, endofunctors, contain, category, universe, class, category objects, functions, morphisms, objects
There are 51 references to this entry.

This is version 5 of category of sets, born on 2002-02-10, modified 2009-04-06.
Object id is 1895, canonical name is CategoryOfSets.
Accessed 9129 times total.

Classification:
AMS MSC18B05 (Category theory; homological algebra :: Special categories :: Category of sets, characterizations)

Pending Errata and Addenda
None.
[ View all 2 ]
Discussion
Style: Expand: Order:
forum policy
"morphisms functions between sets" by jkauzlar on 2008-06-11 22:32:34
FYI, the grammar is confusing here
[ reply | up ]
Category of Sets, according to MacLane by jkauzlar on 2008-06-10 04:28:07
In his book, p12, he gives the following simple definition:

Set: Objects, all small sets; Arrows, all functions between them.

The article might be clearer to say 'all' morphisms, or even 'all possible' morphisms. Then the one-element sets are terminals because of constant functions. I'm still not clear why the empty set has arrows to all other sets.

Additionally, MacLane qualifies the objects as being 'small' sets.
[ reply | up ]
Is this definition specific enough? by jkauzlar on 2008-06-10 03:20:45
In my category theory text 'Category Theory for Computer Science' there is talk of arrows belonging to all categories of sets: the empty set is an 'initial' object in 'Set'. All one-element sets are 'terminal' objects in 'Set'. That is, there are arrows from the empty set to every other set, and arrows from every set to every one-element set.

What I can't figure out is 1) if 'Set', the category of sets, refers to the same category in every context and 2) whether the reason for the definition of these above mentioned arrows should be obvious to me :) Wikipedia has a little more about this category, yet is still vague about the properties mentioned above.

I think this is rather important, since a large number of the examples and exercises near the beginning of the above text depend on an understanding of Set. I understand it's a fundamental category of category theory as well. I'll post back here whatever I discover. Thanks!
[ reply | up ]

Interact
post | correct | update request | add derivation | add example | add (any)