1
$\begingroup$

Let $\mathsf{A}$ be an Abelian category (perhaps vector spaces or modules over your favorite ring), and let $\mathsf{A}(x,y)$ denote the set of morphisms in $\mathsf{A}$ from an object $x$ to another object $y$.

Does there exist a non-trivial partial order on the morphism-sets of $\mathsf{A}$ which behaves well with respect to composition and happens to be monotone with rank, whenever rank is defined?

More specifically, do there exist partial orders $<$ so that for $f,f':x \to y$ and $g, g':y \to z$, we have:

  1. $f < f'$ and $g < g'$ implies $gf < g'f'$ in $\mathsf{A}(x,z)$, and
  2. if $f < f'$ then there is a monomorphism from the image of $f$ to image of $f'$?

Probably the answer is no, but I'm not sure how to prove that no such thing could possibly exist --- even in the category of vector spaces over $\mathbb{R}$ or $\mathbb{C}$.

$\endgroup$
4
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Is there any particular reason you write a partial order as $\lt$ instead of as $\le$? $\endgroup$ Apr 28, 2015 at 1:41
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @QiaochuYuan no, there's isn't. $\endgroup$ Apr 28, 2015 at 1:46
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Okay. Are you attached to partial orders or are you happy with a preorder? $\endgroup$ Apr 28, 2015 at 1:49
  • $\begingroup$ Hmmm, a preorder would be fine! $\endgroup$ Apr 28, 2015 at 1:51

2 Answers 2

6
$\begingroup$

Suppose that $V, W$ are vector spaces and $f, g : V \to W$ are two parallel morphisms such that $f \le g$, for some preorder $\le$ satisfying your conditions.

Claim: $f$ is a scalar multiple of $g$.

Proof. The first condition implies that if $v : 1 \to V$ is any vector in $V$ (here $1$ denotes the $1$-dimensional vector space) then $f \circ v \le g \circ v$. The second condition implies that there is a monomorphism from the image of $f \circ v$ to the image of $g \circ v$ (Edit: here I interpret the condition to mean that the monomorphism must be compatible with the inclusion into $W$, but as Eric Wofsey's answer shows, this extra assumption is unnecessary). This is equivalent to the condition that for all $v \in V$ there is a scalar $\lambda(v)$, possibly zero, such that

$$f(v) = \lambda(v) g(v).$$

Observe that

$$f(v + v') = \lambda(v + v') (g(v) + g(v')) = f(v) + f(v') = \lambda(v) g(v) + \lambda(v') g(v').$$

Hence if $g(v)$ and $g(v')$ are linearly independent it follows that $\lambda(v) = \lambda(v') = \lambda(v + v')$. Now we split into cases.

Case: $\text{im}(g)$ has dimension at least $2$. Then the equivalence relation on vectors in $\text{im}(g)$ generated by "linearly independent" identifies every vector, and it follows that $\lambda(v)$ is a constant $\lambda$ and $f = \lambda g$.

Case: $\text{im}(g)$ has dimension $1$. Then $\text{im}(f)$ is contained in $\text{im}(g)$, and hence has dimension at most $1$. Picking $v_0 \in V$ such that $g(v_0) \neq 0$, we then have $f(v_0) = \lambda(v_0) g(v_0)$, and hence it again follows that $f = \lambda g$ (where $\lambda = \lambda(v_0)$).

Case: $\text{im}(g)$ has dimension $0$. Then $f = g = 0$.

This concludes the proof. $\Box$

So possibilities are limited. Over any field, we can take $f \le g$ iff $f = \lambda g$ for some $\lambda$. This is a preorder, but it's pretty boring: linear maps which are nonzero scalar multiples of each other are isomorphic, and the only order relation which isn't an isomorphism is that $0 \le f$ for any nonzero $f$. Over $\mathbb{R}$ we can take $f \le g$ iff $f = \lambda g$ for some $0 \le \lambda \le 1$. This is even a partial order, but it's still not very interesting.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, Qiaochu! This is exactly what I was looking for! $\endgroup$ Apr 28, 2015 at 11:49
6
$\begingroup$

Suppose you have such a preorder $\leq$. Suppose you have $f,f':x\to y$ such that $f\leq f'$ but $\operatorname{im}(f)\not\subseteq\operatorname{im}(f')$. We can then compose with the quotient $q:y\to y/\operatorname{im}(f')$ and conclude that $qf\leq qf'$ by (1). But this contradicts (2), since the image of $qf'$ is trivial but the image of $qf$ is not. Thus if $f\leq f'$, we must have $\operatorname{im}(f)\subseteq\operatorname{im}(f')$. More generally, by precomposing with the inclusions of subobjects of $x$, we must have that for every subobject $i:w\to x$, $\operatorname{im}(fi)\subseteq\operatorname{im}(f'i)$.

Thus the largest that $\leq$ could possibly be is the following: define $f\leq f'$ to hold iff for every subobject $i:w\to x$, $\operatorname{im}(fi)\subseteq\operatorname{im}(f'i)$. In fact, it is easy to see that this definition does satisfy (1) and (2). Note, however, that in many cases this relation may be pretty trivial; Qiaochu's answer shows that for vector spaces, $f\leq f'$ iff $f$ is a scalar multiple of $f'$. However, this is not true for modules over arbitrary rings. For instance, in $Ab$, any two automorphisms of $\mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z}$ are $\leq$-equivalent, even though they are usually not multiples of each other.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ I was already interpreting the second condition to mean "a monomorphism from the image of $f$ to the image of $f'$ compatible with the inclusions into $y$," but it's nice that that extra bit is unnecessary. $\endgroup$ Apr 28, 2015 at 3:01
  • $\begingroup$ @QiaochuYuan: Yes, I would have assumed that, but the phrase "monotone with rank" suggested otherwise. $\endgroup$ Apr 28, 2015 at 3:02

Your Answer

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

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.