MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

If there is an arrow $h: (A\times B) \to (A\times B)$, then, necessarily $h = \left\lt f,g\right\gt$ for some $f: (A\times B) \to A$ and $g (A\times B) \to B$?

The book I'm studying defines a product $A\times B$ to be an object provided with two projecting arrows $\pi_A : A\times B \to A$ and $\pi_B: A\times B \to B$ such that, for any other object C and arrows $f: C \to A$ and $g : C \to B$ there's exactly one arrow $\left\lt f,g\right\gt: C \to (A\times B)$ such that:

$\pi_A \cdot \left\lt f,g\right\gt = f$

$\pi_B \cdot \left\lt f,g\right\gt = g$

It says nothing about $\left\lt f,g\right\gt$ being the only arrow from $C$ to $A\times B$, but I got that impression later when he asked to prove that all products are isomorphic: I could only prove assuming that any arrow from $A \times B$ to itself was of the form $\left\lt f,g\right\gt$ for some f and g from $A\times B$ to A and B, respectively.

This suggests me that $\left\lt f,g\right\gt$ was meant to be the only possible arrow from C to $A \times B$.

Is this right or did I just misunderstood the book?

share|cite|improve this question
The answer to the question in your current first paragraph is: yes. Each map $f:A\times B\to A\times B$ is the product of the compositions $A\times B\stackrel{f}{\to} A\times B\stackrel{p_1}{\to}A$ and $A\times B\stackrel{f}{\to} A\times B\stackrel{p_2}{\to}B$, with $p_1:A\times B\to A$ and $p_2:A\times B\to B$ the projections. – Mariano Suárez-Alvarez Jul 28 '10 at 0:23
(The proof is left as an exercise for the reader!) – Mariano Suárez-Alvarez Jul 28 '10 at 0:24
Hummm! Now I see! If p1.<p1.f, p2.f> = p1.f and p2.<p1.f, p2.f> = p2.f and <p1.f,p2.f> must be the only arrow with this property, then necessarily f = <p1.f, p2.f>. Thanks. – Rorsa Jul 28 '10 at 0:38
Sorry for the confusing text, but the doubt was not very clear in my mind and I mixed two different things. – Rorsa Jul 28 '10 at 0:38
up vote 3 down vote accepted

The reason you're having trouble proving the uniqueness is that you need to use the projections. There is not a unique map from $C$ to $A \times B$. But there is a unique map given specified maps from $C$ to $A$ and $B$ (i.e. such that the composition of the map from $C$ to the product with the projection gives the map from $C$ to $A$ or $B$). If $C_1$ and $C_2$ are two products, we can use the universal property to construct maps between them. The compositions are then the identity. Why? It is not true that there is only one map from $C_1$ to itself. BUT, there is only one map from $C_1$ to itself which, when composed with $\pi_A$ and $\pi_B$, gives $\pi_A$ and $\pi_B$. If you construct the maps correctly, this will be the case, and you will be able to prove the isomorphism between $C_1$ and $C_2$.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

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