Skip to main content
added 1 character in body
Source Link

I am wondering if the category of small categories $\mathbf{Cat}$ is known to (not) have the Cantor–Schröder–Bernstein property? That is, for any two categories $\mathcal{C}$ and $\mathcal{D}$, does the statement that there exist embedding functors (monomorphisms in $\mathbf{Cat}$) $\mathcal{F}: \mathcal{C} \rightarrow \mathcal{D}$ and $\mathcal{G}: \mathcal{D} \rightarrow \mathcal{C}$ imply that $\mathcal{C} \cong \mathcal{D}$?

If not, what can we say about the validity of the following weaker statement?

For any two categories $\mathcal{C}$ and $\mathcal{D}$, the statement that there exist embedding functors $\mathcal{F}_1: \mathcal{C} \rightarrow \mathcal{D}$ and $\mathcal{F}_2: \mathcal{D} \rightarrow \mathcal{C}$ implies that there exists bimorphisms (epic embedding functors) in $\mathbf{Cat}$ $\mathcal{G}_1: \mathcal{C} \rightarrow \mathcal{D}$ and $\mathcal{G}_2: \mathcal{D} \rightarrow \mathcal{C}$.

Thank you in advance for your help!

I am wondering if the category of small categories $\mathbf{Cat}$ is known to (not) have the Cantor–Schröder–Bernstein property? That is, for any two categories $\mathcal{C}$ and $\mathcal{D}$, does the statement that there exist embedding functors (monomorphisms in $\mathbf{Cat}$) $\mathcal{F}: \mathcal{C} \rightarrow \mathcal{D}$ and $\mathcal{G}: \mathcal{D} \rightarrow \mathcal{C}$ imply that $\mathcal{C} \cong \mathcal{D}$?

If not, what can we say about the validity of the following weaker statement?

For any two categories $\mathcal{C}$ and $\mathcal{D}$, the statement that there exist embedding functors $\mathcal{F}_1: \mathcal{C} \rightarrow \mathcal{D}$ and $\mathcal{F}_2: \mathcal{D} \rightarrow \mathcal{C}$ implies that there exists bimorphisms (epic embedding functors) in $\mathbf{Cat}$ $\mathcal{G}_1: \mathcal{C} \rightarrow \mathcal{D}$ and $\mathcal{G}_2: \mathcal{D} \rightarrow \mathcal{C}$.

Thank you in advance for your help

I am wondering if the category of small categories $\mathbf{Cat}$ is known to (not) have the Cantor–Schröder–Bernstein property? That is, for any two categories $\mathcal{C}$ and $\mathcal{D}$, does the statement that there exist embedding functors (monomorphisms in $\mathbf{Cat}$) $\mathcal{F}: \mathcal{C} \rightarrow \mathcal{D}$ and $\mathcal{G}: \mathcal{D} \rightarrow \mathcal{C}$ imply that $\mathcal{C} \cong \mathcal{D}$?

If not, what can we say about the validity of the following weaker statement?

For any two categories $\mathcal{C}$ and $\mathcal{D}$, the statement that there exist embedding functors $\mathcal{F}_1: \mathcal{C} \rightarrow \mathcal{D}$ and $\mathcal{F}_2: \mathcal{D} \rightarrow \mathcal{C}$ implies that there exists bimorphisms (epic embedding functors) in $\mathbf{Cat}$ $\mathcal{G}_1: \mathcal{C} \rightarrow \mathcal{D}$ and $\mathcal{G}_2: \mathcal{D} \rightarrow \mathcal{C}$.

Thank you in advance for your help!

deleted 1 character in body
Source Link

I am wondering if the category of small categories $\mathbf{Cat}$ is known to (not) have the Cantor–Schröder–Bernstein property? That is, for any two categories $\mathcal{C}$ and $\mathcal{D}$, does the statement that there exist embedding functors (monomorphisms in $\mathbf{Cat}$) $\mathcal{F}: \mathcal{C} \rightarrow \mathcal{D}$ and $\mathcal{G}: \mathcal{D} \rightarrow \mathcal{C}$ imply that $\mathcal{C} \cong \mathcal{D}$?

If not, what can we say about the validity of the following weaker statement?

For any two categories $\mathcal{C}$ and $\mathcal{D}$, the statement that there exist embedding functors $\mathcal{F}_1: \mathcal{C} \rightarrow \mathcal{D}$ and $\mathcal{F}_2: \mathcal{D} \rightarrow \mathcal{C}$ implies that there exists bimorphisms (epic embedding functors) in $\mathbf{Cat}$ $\mathcal{G}_1: \mathcal{C} \rightarrow \mathcal{D}$ and $\mathcal{G}_2: \mathcal{D} \rightarrow \mathcal{C}$.

Thank you in advance for your help!

I am wondering if the category of small categories $\mathbf{Cat}$ is known to (not) have the Cantor–Schröder–Bernstein property? That is, for any two categories $\mathcal{C}$ and $\mathcal{D}$, does the statement that there exist embedding functors (monomorphisms in $\mathbf{Cat}$) $\mathcal{F}: \mathcal{C} \rightarrow \mathcal{D}$ and $\mathcal{G}: \mathcal{D} \rightarrow \mathcal{C}$ imply that $\mathcal{C} \cong \mathcal{D}$?

If not, what can we say about the validity of the following weaker statement?

For any two categories $\mathcal{C}$ and $\mathcal{D}$, the statement that there exist embedding functors $\mathcal{F}_1: \mathcal{C} \rightarrow \mathcal{D}$ and $\mathcal{F}_2: \mathcal{D} \rightarrow \mathcal{C}$ implies that there exists bimorphisms (epic embedding functors) in $\mathbf{Cat}$ $\mathcal{G}_1: \mathcal{C} \rightarrow \mathcal{D}$ and $\mathcal{G}_2: \mathcal{D} \rightarrow \mathcal{C}$.

Thank you in advance for your help!

I am wondering if the category of small categories $\mathbf{Cat}$ is known to (not) have the Cantor–Schröder–Bernstein property? That is, for any two categories $\mathcal{C}$ and $\mathcal{D}$, does the statement that there exist embedding functors (monomorphisms in $\mathbf{Cat}$) $\mathcal{F}: \mathcal{C} \rightarrow \mathcal{D}$ and $\mathcal{G}: \mathcal{D} \rightarrow \mathcal{C}$ imply that $\mathcal{C} \cong \mathcal{D}$?

If not, what can we say about the validity of the following weaker statement?

For any two categories $\mathcal{C}$ and $\mathcal{D}$, the statement that there exist embedding functors $\mathcal{F}_1: \mathcal{C} \rightarrow \mathcal{D}$ and $\mathcal{F}_2: \mathcal{D} \rightarrow \mathcal{C}$ implies that there exists bimorphisms (epic embedding functors) in $\mathbf{Cat}$ $\mathcal{G}_1: \mathcal{C} \rightarrow \mathcal{D}$ and $\mathcal{G}_2: \mathcal{D} \rightarrow \mathcal{C}$.

Thank you in advance for your help

[Edit removed during grace period]
Link
Schroder -> Schröder
Source Link
LSpice
  • 12.9k
  • 4
  • 45
  • 69
Loading
deleted 4 characters in body
Source Link
Loading
deleted 333 characters in body
Source Link
Loading
deleted 222 characters in body
Source Link
Loading
edited body
Source Link
Loading
added 329 characters in body
Source Link
Loading
added 27 characters in body
Source Link
Loading
Source Link
Loading