Alphabeta Math
PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedSession-authored (Fable 5 assisted)precheck passaudited 2026-08-13
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

Equivalences preserve, reflect, and create limits and colimits in the isomorphism-invariant sense

Statement

An equivalence of categories preserves and reflects every existing limit and colimit and creates them in the ordinary isomorphism-invariant sense fixed in Preservation, reflection, and creation of limits and colimits; continuous and cocontinuous functors. This does not assert strict creation with an unchanged target apex.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: An equivalence F:CD.

[F1]

An equivalence has a quasi-inverse G and unit and counit natural isomorphisms (Equivalence, quasi-inverse, and adjoint equivalence of categories, Natural isomorphism).

[L1]

Fully faithful functors reflect limits and colimits (Fully faithful functors reflect limits and colimits).

[F2]

Isomorphism-invariant creation asks for a limiting source lift whose image is isomorphic as a cone to the target limit, together with reflection (Preservation, reflection, and creation of limits and colimits; continuous and cocontinuous functors).

Proof

technique · transport of structure
1.1

Since an equivalence is fully faithful, [L1] proves reflection of limits. The quasi-inverse G is also fully faithful and therefore reflects limits.

F1L1
2.1

If λ is a limit cone in C, apply F. If a cone over FD is given, transport it along the unit and counit of [F1], apply G, and factor uniquely through λ. Transporting the factor back gives existence through Fλ; reflection by G gives uniqueness. Hence F preserves limits.

F1step 1.1
3.1

Let μ be a limiting cone over FD. Applying G and using step 2.1 for G gives a limiting cone over GFD. Transport it along the unit DGFD to a limiting cone μˉ over D. Its image is isomorphic as a cone to μ by the counit and its naturality. Together with reflection from step 1.1, this is creation in [F2].

F1F2step 1.1step 2.1
4.1

Applying [L2] to steps 1.1, 2.1, and 3.1 proves preservation, reflection, and isomorphism-invariant creation of colimits. The construction uses the unit and counit isomorphisms, so it supplies no on-the-nose strict lift.

L2step 1.1step 2.1step 3.1

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · next 3 levels

Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 21 results over 11 levels. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, and this result sits at the bottom with a heavier outline. Click the chart to enlarge it.

Sources