and
nonabelian homological algebra
There is a very general notion of injective objects in a category , and a sequence of refinements as is equipped with more structure and property, in particular for an abelian category or a relative thereof.
Let be a category and a class of morphisms in .
Frequently is the class of all monomorphisms or a related class.
This is notably the case for is a category of chain complexes equipped with the injective model structure on chain complexes and is its class of cofibrations.
An object in is -injective if all diagrams of the form
admit an extension
If is the class of all monomorphisms, we speak merely of an injective object.
Ones says that a category has enough injectives if every object admits a monomorphism into an injective object.
The dual notion is a projective object.
Assuming the axiom of choice, we have the following easy result.
An arbitrary small product of injective objects is injective.
If has a terminal object then these extensions are equivalently lifts
and hence the -injective objects are precisely those that have the right lifting property against the class .
If is a locally small category then is -injective precisely if the hom-functor
takes morphisms in to epimorphisms in Set.
The term injective object is used most frequently in the context that is an abelian category.
For an abelian category the class of monomorphisms is the same as the class of morphisms such that is exact.
By definition of abelian category every monomorphism is a kernel, hence a pullback of the form
for the (algebraic) zero object. By the pasting law for pullbacks we find that also the left square in
is a pullback, hence is exact.
An object of an abelian category is then injective if it satisfies the following equivalent conditions:
the hom-functor is exact;
for all morphisms such that is exact and for all , there exists such that .
See homotopically injective object for a relevant generalization to categories of chain complexes, and its relationship to ordinary injectivity.
Let be a commutative ring and the category of -modules. We discuss injective modules over (see there for more).
The following criterion says that for identifying injective modules it is sufficient to test the right lifting property which characterizes injective objects by def. 1, only on those monomorphisms which include an ideal into the base ring .
If the axiom of choice holds, then a module is an injective module precisely if for any left -ideal regarded as an -module, any homomorphism in can be extended to all of along the inclusion .
This is due to (Baer).
Let be a monomorphism in , and let be a map. We must extend to a map . Consider the poset whose elements are pairs where is an intermediate submodule between and and is an extension of , ordered by if contains and extends . By an application of Zorn's lemma, this poset has a maximal element, say . Suppose is not all of , and let be an element not in ; we show that extends to a map , a contradiction.
The set is an ideal of , and we have a module homomorphism defined by . By hypothesis, we may extend to a module map . Writing a general element of as where , it may be shown that
is well-defined and extends , as desired.
(Assume that the axiom of choice holds.) Let be a Noetherian ring, and let be a collection of injective modules over . Then the direct sum is also injective.
By Baer’s criterion, theorem 1, it suffices to show that for any ideal of , a module homomorphism extends to a map . Since is Noetherian, is finitely generated as an -module, say by elements . Let be the projection, and put . Then for each , is nonzero for only finitely many summands. Taking all of these summands together over all , we see that factors through
for some finite . But a product of injectives is injective, hence extends to a map , which completes the proof.
Conversely, is a Noetherian ring if direct sums of injective -modules are injective.
This is due to Bass and Papp. See (Lam, Theorem 3.46).
Let Ab be the abelian category of abelian groups.
If the axiom of choice holds, then an abelian group is an injective object in Ab precisely if it is a divisible group, in that for all integers we have .
This follows for instance using Baer's criterion, prop. 1.
An explit proof is spelled out at Planet math – abelian group is divisible if and only if it is an injective object
By prop. 3 the following abelian groups are injective in Ab.
The group of rational numbers is injective in Ab, as is the additive group of real numbers and generally that underlying any field. The additive group underlying any vector space is injective. The quotient of any injective group by any other group is injective.
Not injective in Ab is for instance the cyclic group for .
We discuss a list of classes of categories that have enough injective according to def. 2.
Every topos has enough injectives.
Every power object can be shown to be injective, and every object embeds into its power object by the “singletons” map.
Assuming some form of the axiom of choice, the category of abelian groups has enough injectives.
Full AC is much more than required, however; small violations of choice suffices.
As soon as the category Ab of abelian groups has enough injectives, so does the abelian category Mod of modules over some ring .
Observe that the forgetful functor has both a left adjoint (extension of scalars from to ) and a right adjoint (coextension of scalars). Since it has a left adjoint, it is exact, and so its right adjoint preserves injective objects. Thus given any -module , we can embed in an injective abelian group , and then embeds in .
For a field, hence Mod = Vect, ever object is both injective as well as projective.
The category of abelian sheaves on any small site , hence the category of abelian groups in the sheaf topos over , has enough injectives.
A proof of can be found in Peter Johnstone’s book Topos Theory, p261.
This is in stark contrast to the situation for projective objects, which generally do not exist in categories of sheaves.
The category of sheaves of modules over any sheaf of rings? on any small site also enough injectives.
This slick proof of this important fact was pointed out by Colin McLarty in an email to the categories list dated 10 Oct 2010.
Let be an abelian category. Then for every object there is an injective resolution, hence a chain complex
equipped with a a quasi-isomorphism of cochain complexes
projective object, projective presentation, projective cover, projective resolution
injective object, injective presentation, injective envelope, injective resolution
flat object, flat resolution
The notion of injective modules was introduced in
(The dual notion of projective modules was considered explicitly only much later.)
A general discussion can be found in
The general notion of injective objects is in section 9.5, the case of injective complexes in section 14.1.
Using tools from the theory of accessible categories, injective objects are discussed in
Baer’s criterion is discussed in many texts, for example
See also