Generalized reflective cum coreflectiv classes in Top and Unif (Q1364909): Difference between revisions

As is well known the category \textbf{Top} has no proper isomorphism-closed full subcategory that is simultaneously reflective and coreflective in \textbf{Top}. A corresponding result holds for \textbf{Unif}. The authors investigate the question whether these results remain valid if the concepts of being reflective resp. coreflective are replaced by the following weaker ones: almost reflective, multireflective, almost multireflective, orthogonal, multiorthogonal, injective, multiinjective resp. their duals. For \textbf{Top} they show that (1) there is no nontrivial orthogonal and multiprojective subcategory, (2) the pathwise connected spaces are almost reflective and multicoreflective, and (3) the subsequential spaces are almost multireflective and coreflective. Since it is known to be consistent with \textbf{ZFC} that these are no injective and coreflective proper subcategories of \textbf{Top}, the only remaining case concerns almost reflective (or injective) and almost coreflective (or projective) subcategories of \textbf{Top}. For \textbf{Unif} they show that (1) there is no nontrivial orthogonal and multicoreflective subcategory, (2) the uniformly zerodimensional spaces are reflective and almost coreflective, (3) the precompact spaces are reflective and almost multicoreflective, (4) proximally discrete spaces are almost multireflective and coreflective, and (5) the pathwise connected spaces are almost reflective and multicoreflective. The only remaining case concerns almost reflective (or injective) and coreflective subcategories.