Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
Last revision Both sides next revision
seperated_presheaf [2014/10/29 09:55]
nikolaj
seperated_presheaf [2014/10/29 14:29]
nikolaj
Line 7: Line 7:
 | @#FFFDDD: for all     | @#FFFDDD: $s,t\in FU$ | | @#FFFDDD: for all     | @#FFFDDD: $s,t\in FU$ |
 | @#FFFDDD: for all     | @#FFFDDD: $C_U$ ... open cover$(U)$ | | @#FFFDDD: for all     | @#FFFDDD: $C_U$ ... open cover$(U)$ |
-| @#55EE55: postulate ​  | @#55EE55: $\left(\forall (V\in C_U).\ ​F(i)(s)=F(i)(t)\right) \implies s=t$ |+| @#55EE55: postulate ​  | @#55EE55: $\left(\forall (V\in C_U).\ s|_V=t|_V\right) \implies s=t$ |
  
 ==== Discussion ==== ==== Discussion ====
Line 13: Line 13:
  
 ===Elaboration=== ===Elaboration===
-A presheaf in topology assigns a set $FU$ to each open set $U$ of a topological space $\langle X,\mathcal T\rangle$. A [[sheaf]] is a presheaf fulfilling two axioms ('​locality'​ and '​gluing'​) and it's intended to capture the case where $FU$ are sets of sections over a topological space (e.g. the section of a fibre bundle $p:E\to X$, e.g. vector fields) and the arrows $F(i)$ are restrictions of those section to smaller open sets. The definition of a seperated presheaf is the first step towards the definition of a sheaf.+A presheaf in topology assigns a set $FU$ to each open set $U$ of a topological space $\langle X,\mathcal T\rangle$. A [[sheaf]] is a presheaf fulfilling two axioms ('​locality'​ and '​gluing'​) and it's intended to capture the case where $FU$ are sets of sections over a topological space (e.g. the section of a fibre bundle $p:E\to X$, e.g. vector fields, e.g. all 1-forms) and the arrows $F(i)$ are restrictions of those section to smaller open sets. The definition of a seperated presheaf is the first step towards the definition of a sheaf.
  
 **Locality axiom**: To understand the postulate, recall that for sections $s,t:U\to Y$ (or function in general) we trivially have that **Locality axiom**: To understand the postulate, recall that for sections $s,t:U\to Y$ (or function in general) we trivially have that
Line 19: Line 19:
 $s=t\implies \forall(x\in U).\,​s(x)=t(x)$ ​ $s=t\implies \forall(x\in U).\,​s(x)=t(x)$ ​
 and as corollary we have  and as corollary we have 
-$s=t\implies \forall(V\subseteq U).\,​s|_V=t|_V.$.+$s=t\implies \forall(V\subseteq U).\,​s|_V=t|_V$ 
 +.
  
 Sections also fulfill function extensionality,​ which goes in the reverse direction Sections also fulfill function extensionality,​ which goes in the reverse direction
Line 26: Line 27:
 and consequently,​ if $C_U$ is a covering of $U$, then and consequently,​ if $C_U$ is a covering of $U$, then
 $\left(\forall(V\in C_U).\,​s|_V=t|_V\right)\implies s=t$ $\left(\forall(V\in C_U).\,​s|_V=t|_V\right)\implies s=t$
 +.
  
 Now if the $FU$'s of a sheaf are to be a sets of such sections over a topological space, then it should be that the maps $F(i)$ between them can be seen as restriction of the function domains. To this end, if $i:V\to U$ is the inclusion of a small open set $V$ in another $U$, require that if $s,t\in FU$ agree on all restricted domains which make up the cover of $U$, i.e. $F(i)(s)=F(i)(t)$,​ then there can be no other way in which they can differ, so $s=t$. Now if the $FU$'s of a sheaf are to be a sets of such sections over a topological space, then it should be that the maps $F(i)$ between them can be seen as restriction of the function domains. To this end, if $i:V\to U$ is the inclusion of a small open set $V$ in another $U$, require that if $s,t\in FU$ agree on all restricted domains which make up the cover of $U$, i.e. $F(i)(s)=F(i)(t)$,​ then there can be no other way in which they can differ, so $s=t$.
Link to graph
Log In
Improvements of the human condition