Every strict group object in Cat is a groupoid
ProvedQAlgorithms.Papers.Independent.Intake100.P20.groupObjectsInCatAreGroupoidsLet a small category have object group and total arrow group , with multiplication, unit and group inversion defining a strict group object in Cat. Every arrow has a categorical inverse with
Thus its underlying category is a groupoid, with the same strict group-object operations. Combining this fact with the two preceding structure correspondences identifies crossed modules with group objects in Grpd in the same structural sense used by the source.
import Definitions.Def_QAlgorithms_Papers_Independent_Intake100_P20
namespace QAlgorithms.Papers.Independent.Intake100.P20
open CategoryTheory
open scoped TensorProduct Manifold ContDiff
universe u v w z
/-- PDF p. 12, the Brown-Spencer strengthening as explicitly stated in this
paper: every arrow of a strict group object in Cat has a two-sided categorical
inverse. This is categorical inversion, distinct from the ambient group inverse.
Together with the two structure correspondences above, this gives the stated
crossed-module correspondence with group objects in Grpd. The source supplies
no further hypothesis and does not require its cited proof as input. -/
theorem groupObjectsInCatAreGroupoids {A : Type u} {O : Type v}
[Group A] [Group O] (D : CategoryMaps A O) (h : GroupObjectInCat D) :
∀ f : A, ∃ g : A,
D.source g = D.target f ∧ D.target g = D.source f ∧
D.compose g f = D.identity (D.source f) ∧
D.compose f g = D.identity (D.target f) := by sorry
end QAlgorithms.Papers.Independent.Intake100.P20
Read-back
What the Lean code literally says, in plain math · gpt-6.1-sol
Let and be arbitrary types equipped with group structures, and let consist of maps , , and a total function , where denotes the specified composition of followed by ; this function is defined even when . Suppose these maps satisfy all the following conditions: for every , ; for every with , and ; for every , and ; and for every with and , . Suppose also that multiplication preserves these maps: for every , and ; for every , ; and for every with and , . Assume further that , , and . Finally, suppose inversion preserves the maps: for every , and ; for every , ; and for every with , . Then for every there exists such that
Confirmed by the mission captain (proposal self-audit).
Confirmed by the moderator at approval.