Talk:Monomorphism/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Confusing mapping example
let X → D denote the (continuous) restriction map from a topological space X to a dense subset D
This doesn't make sense to me. How is this "restriction map" defined? If X = R and D = Q, how is the image of sqrt(2) defined?? I think this might be reversed from the correct formulation: let i : D --> X be the injective inclusion of a dense subset of a space X. Then i is both monic and epic in Top, but only injective as a set function, not surjective (i.e. taking the forgetful functor, it's image is monic is Set, but not epic.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.31.160.221 (talk) 20:14, 31 March 2005 (UTC)
- No, the example can't be backwards. The inclusion map is injective. We are looking for a continuous map which is not injective but still is a monomorphism in the category of topological spaces. However, it is not clear to me that the example works. As you say, is there an example of a space which can be continuous mapped onto a dense subset? Clearly one cannot continuously map R onto Q since Q is disconnected. Do any examples exist? -- Fropuff 03:59, 1 April 2005 (UTC)
- Sorry, just noticed the example was botched. I removed it and will look for an example elsewhere. - Gauge 08:22, 2 April 2005 (UTC)
- Found an example. Cheers, Gauge 08:59, 2 April 2005 (UTC)
I do not see the need for new pages on the notions of strong monomorphism, etc. I would suggest giving the precise definition here and creating redirects from those if necessary. Magidin 05:20, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
Too technical?
Should the introductory paragraphs be simplified, removing all technical jargon and just explaining the concept before diving in to the technical details? This is an encyclopaedia after all, not a technical manual. Tczuel (talk) 02:11, 19 September 2009 (UTC)