Interior operators, open morphisms and the preservation property (Q2350314): Difference between revisions

Of the various (equivalent) formalisms of topology, interior and closure operators are among the first one sees. Axiomatising some of the formal properties of the closure operator enables a well-developed theory of closure operators on general categories, and thus the study of topological notions in categories of various kinds of structures. The corresponding axiomatisation resulting from abstracting away from the interior operator rather than the closure operator was delayed, perhaps on the assumption that the equivalence in the topological setting entails a more general equivalence, and thus such a theory would be redundant. However, \textit{S. J. R. Vorster} [Quaest. Math. 23, No. 4, 405--416 (2000; Zbl 0974.18003)], formally introducing interior operators on general categories, formulated a precise criterion for the equivalence between interior and closure operators on a a category in the presence of a suitable notion of complementation, noting that the category of groups lacks such structure. This observation merits the study of interior operators independently of the theory of closure operators, as was, and still is, done by many authors. The article introduces the concept of an open morphism in a category with an interior operator (this is done in the expected way). Several interesting results are obtained. Two characterizations of open morphisms, one in terms of a certain preservation property (Theorem 1) and one in terms of preservation of interiors under the inverse function on subobjects (Proposition 3). It is shown that open morphisms respect open subobjects, and if the interior operator is idempotent, then the converse holds as well (Proposition 2). Moreover, the preservation property is related to (weak) hereditarity of the interior operator, with some interesting consequences, one of which is Corollary 2: Every idempotent and weakly hereditary interior operator is hereditary. The article is elegantly written and is yet another demonstration of the utility of studying both closure and interior operators.