nLab geometric embedding

Redirected from "sub-(∞,1)-topos".
Contents

Context

Topos Theory

topos theory

Background

Toposes

Internal Logic

Topos morphisms

Extra stuff, structure, properties

Cohomology and homotopy

In higher category theory

Theorems

Contents

Idea

A geometric embedding is the right notion of embedding or inclusion of topoi F↪EF \hookrightarrow E, i.e. of subtoposes.

Notably the inclusion Sh(S)↪PSh(S)Sh(S) \hookrightarrow PSh(S) of a category of sheaves into its presheaf topos or more generally the inclusion Sh jE↪ESh_j E \hookrightarrow E of sheaves in a topos EE into EE itself, is a geometric embedding. Actually every geometric embedding is of this form, up to equivalence of topoi.

Another perspective is that a geometric embedding F↪EF \hookrightarrow E is the localization of EE at the class WW of morphisms that the left adjoint E→FE \to F sends to isomorphisms in FF.

The induced geometric morphism of a topological immersion X↪YX \hookrightarrow Y is a geometric embedding. The converse holds if YY is a T 0T_0 space. (Example A4.2.12(c) in (Johnstone))

Definition

For FF and EE two topoi, a geometric morphism

F→fEF⟵f *⟶f *E F \stackrel{f}{\to} E \;\;\;\; F \stackrel{\stackrel{f_*}{\longrightarrow}}{\underset{f^*}{\longleftarrow}} E

is a geometric embedding if the following equivalent conditions are satisfied

  • the direct image functor f *f_* is full and faithful (so that FF is a full subcategory of EE);

  • the counit ϵ:f *f *→Id F\epsilon : f^* f_* \to Id_{F} of the adjunction (f *⊣f *)(f^* \dashv f_*) is an isomorphism

  • there is a Lawvere-Tierney topology on EE and an equivalence of categories e:F→≃Sh jEe : F \stackrel{\simeq}{\to} Sh_j E such that the diagram of geometric morphisms F →f * E e↘ ≃ ↑ i Sh jE\array{ F &\stackrel{f_*}{\to}& E \\ & {}_{e}\searrow^\simeq & \uparrow^{i} \\ && Sh_j E} commutes up to natural isomorphism e *i *≃f *e^* i^* \simeq f^*

That the first two conditions are equivalent is standard, that the third one is equivalent to the first two is for instance corollary 7 in section VII, 4 of (MacLaneMoerdijk)

Properties

Relation to localization

There is a close relation between geometric embedding and localization: reflective localization.

Let f:F↪Ef : F \hookrightarrow E be a geometric embedding and let W⊂Mor(E)W \subset Mor(E) be the class of morphisms sent by f *f^* to isomorphisms in FF.

Theorem

We have:

This fact connects for instance the description of sheafification in terms of geometric embedding Sh(S)↪PSh(S)Sh(S) \hookrightarrow PSh(S) as described for instance in

with that in terms of localization at local isomorphisms, as described in

Moreover, this is the basis on which sheafification is generalized to (∞,1)-sheafification in

The following gives a detailed proof of the above assertion.

Write η:Id E→f *f *\eta : Id_E \to f_* f^* for the unit of the adjunction.

Since f *f_* is fully faithful we will identify objects and morphism of FF with their images in EE. To further trim down the notation write (−)¯:=f *\bar {(-)} := f^* for the left adjoint.

Definition

Write WW for the class of morphism that are sent to isomorphism under f *f^*,

W=(f *) −1{g:c→≃d∈Mor(E)}. W = (f^*)^{-1}\{g: c\stackrel{\simeq}{\to} d \in Mor(E)\} \,.
Proposition

EE equipped with the class WW is a category with weak equivalences, in that WW satisfies 2-out-of-3.

Proof

Follows since isomorphisms satisfy 2-out-of-3.

Proposition

WW is a left multiplicative system.

Proof

This follows using the fact that f *f^* is left exact and hence preserves finite limits.

In more detail:

We have already seen in the previous proposition that

  • every isomorphism is in WW;

  • WW is closed under composition.

It remains to check the following points:

Given any

a ↓ w b →h c \array{ && a \\ && \downarrow^w \\ b &\stackrel{h}{\to}& c }

with w∈Ww \in W, we have to show that there is

d → a ↓ w′ ↓ w b →h c \array{ d &\to& a \\ \downarrow^{w'} && \downarrow^w \\ b &\stackrel{h}{\to}& c }

with w′∈Ww' \in W.

To get this, take this to be the pullback diagram, w′:=h *ww' := h^* w. Since f *f^* preserves pullbacks, it follows that

d¯ → a¯ ↓ w¯′ ↓ w¯ b¯ →h¯ c¯ \array{ \bar d &\to& \bar a \\ \downarrow^{\bar w'} && \downarrow^{\bar w} \\ \bar b &\stackrel{\bar h}{\to}& \bar c }

is a pullback diagram in FF with w¯′=h¯ *w¯\bar w' = \bar h^* \bar w. But by assumption w¯\bar w is an isomorphism. Therefore w¯′\bar w' is an isomorphism, therefore w′w' is in WW.

Finally for every

a→s→rb→wc a \stackrel{\stackrel{r}{\to}}{\stackrel{s}{\to}} b \stackrel{w}{\to} c

with w∈Ww \in W such that the two composites coincide, we need to find

d→w′a→s→rb d \stackrel{w'}{\to} a \stackrel{\stackrel{r}{\to}}{\stackrel{s}{\to}} b

with w′∈Ww' \in W such that the composites again coincide.

To get this, take w′w' to be the equalizer of the two morphisms. Sending everything with f *f^* to FF we find from

a¯→s¯→r¯b→w¯c \bar a \stackrel{\stackrel{\bar r}{\to}}{\stackrel{\bar s}{\to}} b \stackrel{\bar w}{\to} c

that r¯=s¯\bar r = \bar s, since w¯\bar w is an isomorphism. This implies that w¯′\bar w' is the equalizer

d¯→w¯′a→s¯→r¯b \bar d \stackrel{\bar w'}{\to} a \stackrel{\stackrel{\bar r}{\to}}{\stackrel{\bar s}{\to}} b

of two equal morphism, hence an identity. So w′w' is in WW.

Proposition

For every object a∈Ea \in E

  • the unit η a:a→a¯\eta_a : a \to \bar a is in WW;

  • if aa is already in FF then the unit is already an isomorphism.

Proof

This follows from the triangle identities of the adjoint functors.

↗ ⇓ η ↘ Id E E →(−)¯ F ↪ E →(−)¯ F ↘ ⇓ ≃ ↗ Id F= ↗↘ (−)¯ E ⇓ Id F ↘↗ (−)¯ \array{ & \nearrow &\Downarrow^{\eta}& \searrow^{Id_E} \\ E &\stackrel{\bar{(-)}}{\to}& F &\hookrightarrow& E &\stackrel{\bar{(-)}}{\to}& F \\ &&& \searrow &\Downarrow^{\simeq}& \nearrow_{Id_F} } \;\;\;\; = \;\;\;\; \array{ & \nearrow \searrow^{\bar{(-)}} \\ E &\Downarrow^{Id}& F \\ & \searrow \nearrow_{\bar{(-)}} }

and

↗ ⇓ η ↘ Id E F ↪ E →(−)¯ F ↪ E ↘ ⇓ ≃ ↗ Id F= ↗↘ F ⇓ Id E ↘↗ \array{ &&& \nearrow &\Downarrow^{\eta}& \searrow^{Id_E} \\ F &\hookrightarrow& E &\stackrel{\bar{(-)}}{\to}& F &\hookrightarrow& E \\ & \searrow &\Downarrow^{\simeq}& \nearrow_{Id_F} } \;\;\;\; = \;\;\;\; \array{ & \nearrow \searrow \\ F &\Downarrow^{Id}& E \\ & \searrow \nearrow }

In components they say that

  • for every a∈Ea \in E we have (a¯→η¯ aa¯¯→≃a¯)=Id a¯(\bar a \stackrel{\bar \eta_a}{\to} \bar{\bar a} \stackrel{\simeq}{\to} \bar a) = Id_{\bar a}

  • for every a∈Fa \in F we have (a→η aa¯→≃a)=Id a(a \stackrel{\eta_a}{\to} \bar a \stackrel{\simeq}{\to} a) = Id_a

This implies the claim.

Definition

An object a∈Ea \in E is WW-local object if for every g:c→dg : c \to d in WW the map

g *:Hom E(d,a)→≃Hom E(c,a) g^* : Hom_E(d,a) \stackrel{\simeq}{\to} Hom_E(c,a)

obtained by precomposition is an isomorphism.

Proposition

Up to isomorphism, the WW-local objects are precisely the objects of FF in EE

Proof

First assume that a∈Fa \in F. We need to show that aa is WW-local.

Notice that the existence of the required isomorphism Hom F(d,a)≃Hom F(c,a) Hom_F(d,a) \simeq Hom_F(c,a) is equivalent to the statement that for every diagram

c → d ↓ h a \array{ c &\stackrel{}{\to}& d \\ \downarrow^{h} \\ a }

there is a unique extension

c → d ↓ h ↙ a. \array{ c &\stackrel{}{\to}& d \\ \downarrow^{h} & \swarrow \\ a } \,.

To see the existence of this extension, hit the original diagram with f *f^* to get

c¯ →≃ d¯ ↓ h¯ a¯≃a. \array{ \bar c &\stackrel{\simeq}{\to}& \bar d \\ \downarrow^{\bar h} \\ \bar a \simeq a } \,.

By the assumption that c→dc \to d is in WW the morphism c¯→d¯\bar c \to \bar d here is an isomorphism. By the assumption that aa is already in FF we have a¯≃a\bar a \simeq a since the counit is an isomorphism. Therefore this diagram clearly has a unique extension

c¯ →≃ d¯ ↓ h¯ ↙ ∃!k a¯≃a. \array{ \bar c &\stackrel{\simeq}{\to}& \bar d \\ \downarrow^{\bar h} & \swarrow_{\exists ! k} \\ \bar a \simeq a } \,.

By the hom-isomorphism (using full faithfullness of f *f_* to work entirely in EE)

Hom E(d¯,a)≃Hom E(d,a) Hom_E(\bar d, a) \simeq Hom_E(d,a)

this defines a morphism k:d→ak : d \to a. Chasing kk through the naturality diagram of the hom-isomorphism

Hom E(d¯,a¯) →≃ Hom E(d,a¯) ↓ ↓ Hom E(c¯,a¯) →≃ Hom E(c,a¯). \array{ Hom_E(\bar d, \bar a) &\stackrel{\simeq}{\to}& Hom_E(d,\bar a) \\ \downarrow && \downarrow \\ Hom_E(\bar c, \bar a) &\stackrel{\simeq}{\to}& Hom_E(c,\bar a) } \,.

shows that k:d→ak : d \to a does extend the original diagram. Again by the Hom-isomorphism, it is the unique morphism with this property.

So a∈Fa \in F is WW-local.

Now for the converse, assume that a given aa is WW-local.

By one of the above propositions we know that the unit η a:a→a¯\eta_a : a \to \bar a is in WW, so by the WW-locality of aa it follows that

a →η a a¯ ↓ Id a a \array{ a &\stackrel{\eta_a}{\to}& \bar a \\ \downarrow^{Id_a} \\ a }

has an extension

a →η a a¯ ↓ Id a ↙ ρ a a. \array{ a &\stackrel{\eta_a}{\to}& \bar a \\ \downarrow^{Id_a} & \swarrow_{\rho_a} \\ a } \,.

By the 2-out-of-3 property of WW shown in one of the above propositions, (using that Id aId_a, being an isomorphism, is in WW) it follows that ρ a:a¯→a\rho_a : \bar a \to a is in WW.

Since a¯\bar a is in FF and therefore WW-local by the above, it follows that also

a¯ →ρ a a ↓ Id a¯ a¯ \array{ \bar a &\stackrel{\rho_a}{\to}& a \\ \downarrow^{Id_{\bar a}} \\ \bar a }

has an extension

a¯ →ρ a a ↓ Id a¯ ↙ λ a a¯. \array{ \bar a &\stackrel{\rho_a}{\to}& a \\ \downarrow^{Id_{\bar a}} & \swarrow_{\lambda_a} \\ \bar a } \,.

So η a\eta_a has a left inverse ρ a\rho_a which itself has a left inverse λ a\lambda_a. It follows that ρ a\rho_a is also a right inverse to η a\eta_a, since

→ρ a→η a =→ρ a→η a→ρ a→λ a⏟id =→ρ a→η a→ρ a⏟id→λ a =→ρ a→λ a =Id. \begin{aligned} \stackrel{\rho_a}{\to} \stackrel{\eta_a}{\to} & = \stackrel{\rho_a}{\to} \stackrel{\eta_a}{\to} \underset{id}{\underbrace{ \stackrel{\rho_a}{\to} \stackrel{\lambda_a}{\to} }} \\ & = \stackrel{\rho_a}{\to} \underset{id}{\underbrace{ \stackrel{\eta_a}{\to} \stackrel{\rho_a}{\to} }} \stackrel{\lambda_a}{\to} \\ &= \stackrel{\rho_a}{\to} \stackrel{\lambda_a}{\to} \\ &= Id \end{aligned} \,.

So if aa is WW-local we find that η a:a→a¯\eta_a : a \to \bar a is an isomorphism, hence that aa is isomorphic to an object of FF.

Corollary

FF is equivalent to the full subcategory E W−locE_{W-loc} of EE on WW-local objects.

Proof

By standard reasoning (e.g. KS lemma 1.3.11) there is a functor F→E W−locF \to E_{W-loc} and a natural isomorphism

F ↪ E ↘ ⇓ ≃ ↗ E W−loc. \array{ F &&\hookrightarrow&& E \\ & \searrow &\Downarrow^{\simeq}& \nearrow \\ && E_{W-loc} } \,.

Since F↪EF \hookrightarrow E and E W−loc↪EE_{W-loc} \hookrightarrow E are full and faithful, so is F→E W−locF \to E_{W-loc}. Since by the above it is also essentially surjective, it establishes the equivalence F≃E W−locF \simeq E_{W-loc}.

Proposition

FF is equivalent to the localization E[W −1]E[W^{-1}] of EE at WW.

Proof

By one of the above propositions we know that WW is a left multiplicative systems.

This implies that the localization E[W −1]E[W^{-1}] is (equivalent to) the category with the same objects as EE, and with hom-sets given by

Hom E[W −1](a,b)=colima′→p∈WaHom E(a′,b). Hom_{E[W^{-1}]}(a,b) = \underset{a' \stackrel{p \in W}{\to}a}{colim} Hom_E(a',b) \,.

There is an obvious candidate for a functor

F→E[W −1] F \to E[W^{-1}]

given on objects by the usual embedding by f *f_* and on morphism by the map which regards a morphism trivially as a span with left leg the identity

(a→b)↦(a → b ↓ Id a a). (a \to b) \;\; \mapsto \;\; \left( \array{ a &\to& b \\ \downarrow^{Id_a} \\ a } \right) \,.

For this to be an equivalence of categories we need to show that this is a essentially surjective and full and faithful functor.

To see essential surjectivity, let aa be any object in EE and let η a:a→a¯\eta_a : a \to \bar a be the component of the unit of our adjunction on aa, as above. By one of the above propositons, η a\eta_a is in WW. This means that the span

a →Id a a ↓ η a a¯ \array{ a &\stackrel{Id_a}{\to}& a \\ \downarrow^{\eta_a} \\ \bar a }

represents an element in Hom E[W −1](a¯,a)Hom_{E[W^{-1}]}(\bar a,a), and this element is clearly an isomorphism: the inverse is represented by

a →η a a¯ ↓ Id a a. \array{ a &\stackrel{\eta_a}{\to}& \bar a \\ \downarrow^{Id_a} \\ a } \,.

Since every a¯\bar a is in the image of our functor, this shows that it is essentially surjective.

To see fullness and faithfulness, let a,b∈Fa, b\in F be any two objects. By one of the above propositions this means in particular that bb is a WW-local object. As discussed above, this means that every span

a′ → b ↓ w a \array{ a' &\to& b \\ \downarrow^w \\ a }

with w∈Ww \in W has a unique extension

a′ → b ↓ w ↗ a. \array{ a' &\to& b \\ \downarrow^w & \nearrow \\ a } \,.

But this implies that in the colimit that defines the hom-set of E[W −1]E[W^{-1}] all these spans are identified with spans whose left leg is the identiy. And these are clearly in bijection with the morphisms in Hom E(a,b)≃Hom F(a,b)Hom_E(a,b) \simeq Hom_F(a,b) so that indeed

Hom E[W −1](a,b)≃Hom F(a,b) Hom_{E[W^{-1}]}(a,b) \simeq Hom_{F}(a,b)

for all a,b∈Fa,b \in F. Hence our functor is also full and faithful and therefore define an equivalence of categories

F→≃E[W −1]. F \stackrel{\simeq}{\to} E[W^{-1}] \,.

Factorizations and images

There is a factorization system on the 2-category Topos whose left class is the surjective geometric morphisms and whose right class is the geometric embeddings. The factorization of a geometric morphism can be said to construct its image in the topos-theoretic sense.

See geometric surjection/embedding factorization.

Moreover, each geometric embedding itself has a (dense,closed)-factorization.

In the more general context of (∞,1)-topos theory an (∞,1)(\infty,1)-geometric embedding is an (∞,1)-geometric morphism

(f *⊣f *):𝒳↪←𝒴 (f^* \dashv f_*) : \mathcal{X} \stackrel{\leftarrow}{\hookrightarrow} \mathcal{Y}

such that the right adjoint direct image f *f_* is a full and faithful (∞,1)-functor.

See reflective sub-(∞,1)-category for more details.

References

Section VII, 4 of

and section A4.2 of

Last revised on August 11, 2026 at 22:47:46. See the history of this page for a list of all contributions to it.