As we know the pullback, pushout in category theory is defined by filling the squares. Somehow I also learnt, actually before, pullback of a differential form on a manifold, pullback map on cohomology or pushforward measure... simply by precomposition or postcompostion. So how are these terms connected? Can I rewrite the definition pullback of a vector field as in category theory?
2026-04-05 20:48:55.1775422135
Pullbacks and pushforward of objects
965 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in CATEGORY-THEORY
- (From Awodey)$\sf C \cong D$ be equivalent categories then $\sf C$ has binary products if and only if $\sf D$ does.
- Continuous functor for a Grothendieck topology
- Showing that initial object is also terminal in preadditive category
- Is $ X \to \mathrm{CH}^i (X) $ covariant or contravariant?
- What concept does a natural transformation between two functors between two monoids viewed as categories correspond to?
- Please explain Mac Lane notation on page 48
- How do you prove that category of representations of $G_m$ is equivalent to the category of finite dimensional graded vector spaces?
- Terminal object for Prin(X,G) (principal $G$-bundles)
- Show that a functor which preserves colimits has a right adjoint
- Show that a certain functor preserves colimits and finite limits by verifying it on the stalks of sheaves
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
I tend to view "pullback" and "pushout" as sort of catch-all terms for constructions that behave similarly, without there necessarily being a formal definition that encompasses all usages of the terms. The pushforward of vector fields, and pushforward of measures, are similar: given $f : M \to N$ a map of manifolds, then $f_*$ defines a functor $\mathbf{Vect}_M \to \mathbf{Vect}_N$; and similarly, given a function $f : X \to Y$, the pushforward $f_*$ defines a function $\mathbf{Meas}_X \to \mathbf{Meas}_Y$. And furthermore, both are "functorial" in a sense on $f$: so we get a covariant functor $\mathbf{Vect} : \mathbf{Manifolds} \to \mathbf{Cat}$ and a covariant functor $\mathbf{Meas} : \mathbf{Sets} \to \mathbf{Sets}$. Or similarly, for pullbacks of $k$-forms on manifolds, we would get a contravariant functor $k\mathbf{-Forms} : \mathbf{Manifolds} \to \mathbf{Vect_{\mathbb{R}}}$.
The case of pullback or pushforward maps in cohomology might be a bit trickier to interpret in this way. Perhaps, you could define a "cohomology theory" on an abelian category $\mathbf{C}$ as being a family of covariant functors $H^i : \mathbf{C} \to \mathbf{Ab}$ along with the appropriate long exact sequences corresponding to short exact sequences in $\mathbf{C}$, possibly with some consistency conditions between the functorial structures of $H^i$ and the long exact sequences. Here, the pushforward maps would be the "covariant functor" parts of the definition.
Or similarly, for de Rham cohomology on manifolds, the pullback map associated to a morphism $f : M \to N$ gives a family of maps $f^* : H^i_{DR}(N) \to H^i_{DR}(M)$; and again, this is functorial in $f$, so that each $H^i_{DR}$ becomes a contravariant functor $\mathbf{Manifolds} \to \mathbf{Vect}_{\mathbb{R}}$. (And furthermore, in this case, it tends to be compatible with extra structure such as Mayer-Vietoris long exact sequences.)
As for the general categorical pullback construction? This might seem a bit artificial at first but becomes useful for example in the study of topos theory: if we have a category $\mathbf{C}$ with pullbacks and a morphism $f \in \operatorname{Hom}_{\mathbf{C}}(X, Y)$ where $X, Y \in \operatorname{Ob}(\mathbf{C})$, then the pullback construction induces a functor between slice categories $\mathbf{C}_{/Y} \to \mathbf{C}_{/X}$. (Here $\mathbf{C}_{/X}$ has as objects a pair of an object $Z$ in $\mathbf{C}$ and a morphism in $\operatorname{Hom}_{\mathbf{C}}(Z, X)$, and the morphisms from $(Z, g)$ to $(Z', g')$ are the morphisms $h \in \operatorname{Hom}_{\mathbf{C}}(Z, Z')$ such that $g' \circ h = g$.) And this functor $\mathbf{C}_{/Y} \to \mathbf{C}_{/X}$ is functorial in $f$, in the sense that $\mathbf{C}_{/-}$ roughly induces a contravariant functor $\mathbf{C} \to \mathbf{Cat}$. (Though due to the fact that the pullback is only unique up to unique isomorphism, we might need to say something along the lines that this is actually a 2-functor, rather than a regular functor. Come to think of it, the same probably also applies to $\mathbf{Vect} : \mathbf{Manifolds} \to \mathbf{Cat}$. What this means is: in these cases, instead of literally $(f\circ g)^* = g^* \circ f^*$, we instead have canonical isomorphisms of functors $(f \circ g)^* \simeq g^* \circ f^*$.)
So, what I'd say is roughly the common theme of these examples: given a morphism $f : X \to Y$, a pullback construction is something taking objects associated in some way to $Y$ to objects associated in the same way to $X$; and usually, this should be (contravariant) functorial in $f$, so that $(f \circ g)^* = g^* \circ f^*$. Likewise, a pushforward construction is something taking objects associated in some way to $X$ to objects associated in the same way to $Y$, in a covariant functorial way, i.e. $(f \circ g)_* = f_* \circ g_*$.