|
|
|
Main Menu
|
|
Sections
Meta
Talkback
Downloads
Information
|
|
|
|
|
|
axiomatic theories of metacategories and supercategories
|
(Axiom)
|
|
0.1 Introduction
This is a topic on the axioms of categories, metacategories and supercategories that are relevant,
respectively, to mathematics and meta-mathematics. Lawvere’s elementary theory of abstract
categories (ETAC) provides an axiomatic construction of the theory of categories and functors.
Intuitively, with this terminology and axioms, a category is meant to be any structure which is a
direct interpretation of ETAC. A functor is then understood to be a triple consisting of two such
categories and of a rule F (‘the functor’) which assigns to each arrow or morphism x of the
first category, a unique morphism, written as ‘F(x)’ of the second category, in such a
way that the usual two conditions on both objects and arrows in the standard functor
definition are fulfilled –the functor is well behaved, i.e., it carries object identities to image
object identities, and commutative diagrams to image commmutative diagrams of the
corresponding image objects and image morphisms. At the next level, one then defines natural
transformations or functorial morphisms between functors as meta-level abbreviated formulas and
equations pertaining to commutative diagrams of the distinct images of two functors
acting on both objects and morphisms. As the name indicates natural transformations
are also well–behaved in terms of the ETAC equations that are satisfied by natural
transformations.
0.2 ETAS and ETAC
Categories were defined in refs. [9, 10] as mathematical interpretations of the ‘elementary theory of
abstract categories’ (ETAC). One can generalize the theory of categories to higher dimensions– as
in higher dimensional algebra (HDA)– by defining multiple composition laws and allowing higher
dimensional, functorial morphisms of several variables to be employed in such higher dimensional
structures. Thus, one can introduce an elementary theory of supercategories (ETAS;([1, 2])
as a natural extension of Lawvere’s ETAC theory to higher dimensions ([7]). Then,
supercategories can be defined as mathematical interpretations of the ETAS axioms as in
ref.[1].
Definition 0.1. A concrete metagraph ℳG consists of objects, A,B,C,... and arrows
f,g,h,... between objects, and two operations as follows:
- a domain operation, dom, which assigns to each arrow f an object A = dom f
- a codomain operation, cod, which assigns to each arrow f an object B = cod f,
represented as f : A → B or A
B
Remark 0.1. Related concepts to the general notion of a supercategory recalled above can
also be rendered graphically on a computer as a multigraph or a hypergraph. More generally,
the class of metagraphs can be also defined as a specific class of supercategories. On the
other hand, a supercomputer architecture and operating system software are examples of
realizations of relatively simple, or lower dimensional supercategories, as explained in further
detail in the next subsections.
1 ETAS Axioms:
- (S1). All symbols, formulas and the eight axioms defined in ETAC are, respectively,
also ETAS symbols, formulas and axioms; thus, for any letters x,y,i,u,A,B, and unary
function symbols Δ0 and Δ1, and composition laws Γi, the following are defined as
formulas: Δ0(x) = A,Δ1(x) = B, Γ(x,y; u), and x = y.
The above formulas are to be, respectively, interpreted as “A is the domain of x”,
“B is the codomain, or range, of x”, “u is the composition x followed by y”, and “x
equals y”; letters i,j,k,l,m,... are to be interpreted as “either element, set or class (C
) indices”. An example of valid ETAC and ETAS formula is a couple or pair of two
letters written as “(x,y)”; a more general related example is that of Cartesian or direct
products Πi in C.
- (S2). There are several composition laws defined in ETAS (as distinct from ETAC
where there is only one composition law for each interpretation in any specific
type of category ); such multiple composition laws Γi, with i in C are interpreted
as “definitions of multiple (specific) mathematical structures, within the same
supercategory §” .
In the case of general algebras, the multiple composition laws are interpreted as “definitions of
algebraic structures”, (whereas categorical algebra is interpreted as being “defined by a single
composition law Γ1 = ∘ (or “*” for -involution or C∗ -algebras )”. An ETAC structure is thus
identified by the singleton index set.
1.1 Examples of supercategories
Pseudographs, hypergraphs, 1-categories, categorical algebras, 2-categories, n-categories, functor
categories, super-categories, super-diagrams, functor supercatgeories, double groupoids, double
categories, organismic supercategories, self-replicating quantum automata, standard Heyting topos,
generalized LMn-logic algebra topoi, double algebroids, super-categories of double algebroids,
and any higher dimensional algebra (HDA) are examples of supercategories of various
orders.
1.2 Graphic example of a supercategory
A pictorial representation of a particular class of metagraphs –the class of multigraphs, Mg– is also
useful as a visual or ‘geometric’ (or topological) representation of a specific example of a
supercategory defined over the topological space of the multigraph with the composition operations
of the supercategory heteromorphisms defined, in this case of the multigraph, by the
concatenations of the multigraph vertices in n dimensions for a finite , n-dimensional multigraph
that can be graphically rendered on a computer.
1.3 Metagraphs and Metacategories
Definition 1.1. A more recent version of Lawvere’s axioms was presented by MacLane
(2000) in which a metagraph is first defined as a structure consisting of objects a,b,c,...x,y,z,
arrows f,g,h,..., and two operations– the Domain (which assigns to each arrow f an object
a = dom f), and a Codomain (which assigns to each arrow f an object b = cod f.
Such operations can be readily represented by displaying f as an actual arrow . → .
starting at the dom f and ending at cod f, f : a → b. With this pictorial, or ‘geometric’
representation, a finite number of arrows is depicted as a finite graph. Then, one defines a
metacategory as a metagraph with two additional operations, Identity and Composition(viz.
[12]). Identity assigns to each object a an arrow ida = 1a : a → a. A composition operation
assigns to each pair of arrows (f,g) with dom g = cod f an arrow called their composite,
g ∘ f : dom f → cod g.
References
[1] I.C. Baianu: 1970, Organismic Supercategories: II. On Multistable Systems. Bulletin
of Mathematical Biophysics, 32: 539-561.
[2] I.C. Baianu : 1971a, Organismic Supercategories and Qualitative Dynamics of
Systems. Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics, 33 (3), 339–354.
[3] I.C. Baianu: 1977, A Logical Model of Genetic Activities in Łukasiewicz Algebras:
The Non-linear Theory. Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics, 39: 249-258.
[4] I.C. Baianu: 1980, Natural Transformations of Organismic Structures. Bulletin of
Mathematical Biophysics 42: 431-446.
[5] I.C. Baianu, Brown R., J. F. Glazebrook, and Georgescu G.: 2006,
Complex Nonlinear Biodynamics in Categories, Higher Dimensional Algebra and
Łukasiewicz–Moisil Topos: Transformations of Neuronal, Genetic and Neoplastic
networks, Axiomathes 16 Nos. 1–2, 65–122.
[6] R. Brown R, P.J. Higgins, and R. Sivera.: “Non-Abelian Algebraic Topology”,(vol.
2. in preparation). (2008).
[7] R. Brown, J. F. Glazebrook and I. C. Baianu: A categorical and higher dimensional
algebra framework for complex systems and spacetime structures, Axiomathes
17:409–493. (2007).
[8] R. Brown and C.B. Spencer: Double groupoids and crossed modules, Cahiers Top.
Géom.Diff. 17 (1976), 343–362.
[9] W.F. Lawvere: 1963. Functorial Semantics of Algebraic Theories. Proc. Natl. Acad.
Sci. USA, 50: 869–872
[10] W. F. Lawvere: 1966. The Category of Categories as a Foundation for Mathematics.
, In Proc. Conf. Categorical Algebra–La Jolla, 1965, Eilenberg, S et al., eds. Springer
–Verlag: Berlin, Heidelberg and New York, pp. 1–20.
[11] L. Löfgren: 1968. On Axiomatic Explanation of Complete Self–Reproduction. Bull.
Math. Biophysics, 30: 317–348.
[12] S. Mac Lane. 2000. Ch.1: Axioms for Categories, in Categories for the Working
Mathematician. Springer: Berlin, 2nd Edition.
"axiomatic theories of metacategories and supercategories" is owned by bci1.(view preamble)
|
|
See Also: category, hypergraph, topic on axioms, index of algebraic topology
| Also defines: |
OS, supercategory, metacategory, metagraph |
| Keywords: |
axioms, theory of metacategories, theory of supercategories, organismic supercategories (OS) |
Cross-references: graph, topological, representation, double algebroids, topos, quantum automata, organismic supercategories, double categories, double groupoids, super-categories, functor categories, categorical algebra, algebraic, type, composition, function, system, supercomputer, hypergraph, computer, concepts, codomain, domain, operations, ETAS axioms, ETAS, composition laws, HDA, higher dimensional algebra, formulas, natural transformations, diagrams, commutative diagrams, identities, functors, ETAC, elementary theory of abstract categories, categories
There are 7 references to this object.
This is version 10 of axiomatic theories of metacategories and supercategories, born on 2010-05-09, modified 2010-05-10.
Object id is 864, canonical name is AxiomaticTheoriesOfMetacategoriesAndSupercategories.
Accessed 4242 times total.
Classification:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pending Errata and Addenda
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|