7
$\begingroup$

Suppose that $\mathcal{E}$ is a (Grothendieck) topos. It carries a (large) Grothendieck topology (in fact the canonical topology), a basis of which is determined by declaring a collection of morphisms $\left(f_\alpha:E_\alpha \to E\right)$ to be a covering family if the induced map $\coprod E_\alpha \to E$ is an epimorphism. On one hand, it is well known result (and I know some "by hand" proofs) that a functor $$F:\mathcal{E}^{op} \to Set$$ is a sheaf for this topology if and only if $F$ is representable. (I.e. $\mathcal{E}$ is sheaves over itself.) On the other hand, a functor $$F:\mathcal{E}^{op} \to Set$$ is representable if and only if $$F^{op}:\mathcal{E} \to Set^{op}$$ has a right adjoint, and since $\mathcal{E}$ is locally presentable, by the adjoint functor theorem this is if and only if $$F:\mathcal{E}^{op} \to Set$$ preserves limits. It is easy to show that every representable is a sheaf for this topology (since every epi is an effective epi), hence any limit preserving functor $$F:\mathcal{E}^{op} \to Set$$ is a sheaf. Is there a slick way of seeing the converse?

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ Well the first two facts of single line arguments, so not so "unslick". What about coequalizers? $\endgroup$ Mar 5, 2013 at 23:57
  • $\begingroup$ *of=are ( ) $\endgroup$ Mar 5, 2013 at 23:58
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, I see the problem now. Hrm. Nevermind! $\endgroup$
    – Zhen Lin
    Mar 6, 2013 at 0:06
  • $\begingroup$ @Zhen: I wish you didn't delete your comment, since now the comments make no sense. Anyway, the two facts above were that $F^{op}$ preserves the initial object, and arbitrary coproducts. If we knew if preserve coequalizers, we'd be done. Notice however, that it does preserve coequalizers by equivalence relations, since these are covers. $\endgroup$ Mar 6, 2013 at 20:34

0

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.