Does monotonicity imply surjectivity?

98 Views Asked by At

There is an exercise in "An introduction to Category Theory" by Harold Simmons says:

Consider any pair of $\mathcal{Pos}$-arrows $f: S \rightarrow T$ and $g: T \rightarrow S$.

Show that when both $id_S \le g \circ f$ and $f \circ g \le id_T$, if $f \dashv g$ then

$$f \circ g \circ f = f \quad g \circ f \circ g = g $$

There is a solution to this exercise ([here](http://www.cambridge.org/us/download_file/150877/, exercise 1.3.6(b) on page 12)), which I don't understand:

To prove $f \circ g \circ f = f$, we know that $\forall a \in S, id_s(a) \le (g \circ f)(a)$ and because $f$ is a monotonic function($\mathcal{Pos}$-arrow), we know that $f(a) \le (f \circ g \circ f)(a)$, so far so good.

On the other hand, it states that for each $b \in T$, we have $$ (f \circ g)(b) \le b $$ and hence $$ (f \circ g \circ f)(a) \le f(a) $$ as a particular case.

But here how can we go from $b$ to $f(a)$? It might look obvious but for $f$ we only know that it is monotonic, to make sure $\forall b \in T, \exists a \in S, f(a) = b$ we need $f$ to be surjective. However this concern isn't seen in the proof.

So even if it doesn't sound good to me, I guess monotonicity implies surjectivity?

EDIT:

I think in general if there is a poset $S$, $\forall a,b \in S$, if $a \le b$, then it is fine to "add any monotone to the left side" (i.e $f(a) \le f(b), (g \circ f)(a) \le (g \circ f)(b),(h \circ g \circ f)(a) \le (h \circ g \circ f)(b), \ldots $, sorry I don't know the formal terminology for this) But I doubt the same holds when you are "adding monotone to the right side".

1

There are 1 best solutions below

1
On BEST ANSWER

No, monocity doesn't imply surjectivity, but we don't even need surjectivity.

By hypothesis, we know that for all $b\in T$ we have $(f\circ g)(b)\le b$. In particular, for any $a\in S$, it also holds for the element $f(a)\in T$ written in place of $b$.

By the way, the conditions on the pair $f,g$ (to satisfy $id_S \le g\circ f$ and $f\circ g\le id_T$) make the definition of $f$ being left adjoint to $g$, i.e. $f\dashv g$ (also called a 'Galois connection' between $S$ and $T^{op}$).