Further remarks on systems of interlocking exact sequences

In a system of interlocking sequences, the assumption that three out of the four sequences are exact does not guarantee the exactness of the fourth. In 1967, Hilton proved that, with the additional condition that it is differential at the crossing points, the fourth sequence is also exact. In this p...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Peter Hilton, C. Joanna Su
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Hindawi Limited 2005-01-01
Series:International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/IJMMS.2005.155
id doaj-0be986764beb49f8a872d6926abb88a9
record_format Article
spelling doaj-0be986764beb49f8a872d6926abb88a92020-11-25T00:03:00ZengHindawi LimitedInternational Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences0161-17121687-04252005-01-012005115516210.1155/IJMMS.2005.155Further remarks on systems of interlocking exact sequencesPeter Hilton0C. Joanna Su1Department of Mathematical Sciences, State University of New York at Binghamton, Binghamton 13902-6000, NY, USADepartment of Mathematics and Computer Science, Providence College, Providence 02918, RI, USAIn a system of interlocking sequences, the assumption that three out of the four sequences are exact does not guarantee the exactness of the fourth. In 1967, Hilton proved that, with the additional condition that it is differential at the crossing points, the fourth sequence is also exact. In this paper, we trace such a diagram and analyze the relation between the kernels and the images, in the case that the fourth sequence is not necessarily exact. Regarding the exactness of the fourth sequence, we remark that the exactness of the other three sequences does guarantee the exactness of the fourth at noncrossing points. As to a crossing point p, we need the extra criterion that the fourth sequence is differential. One notices that the condition, for the fourth sequence, that kernel ⊇ image at p turns out to be equivalent to the “opposite” condition kernel ⊆ image. Next, for the kernel and the image at p of the fourth sequence, even though they may not coincide, they are not far different—they always have the same cardinality as sets, and become isomorphic after taking quotients by a subgroup which is common to both. We demonstrate these phenomena with an example.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/IJMMS.2005.155
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Peter Hilton
C. Joanna Su
spellingShingle Peter Hilton
C. Joanna Su
Further remarks on systems of interlocking exact sequences
International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences
author_facet Peter Hilton
C. Joanna Su
author_sort Peter Hilton
title Further remarks on systems of interlocking exact sequences
title_short Further remarks on systems of interlocking exact sequences
title_full Further remarks on systems of interlocking exact sequences
title_fullStr Further remarks on systems of interlocking exact sequences
title_full_unstemmed Further remarks on systems of interlocking exact sequences
title_sort further remarks on systems of interlocking exact sequences
publisher Hindawi Limited
series International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences
issn 0161-1712
1687-0425
publishDate 2005-01-01
description In a system of interlocking sequences, the assumption that three out of the four sequences are exact does not guarantee the exactness of the fourth. In 1967, Hilton proved that, with the additional condition that it is differential at the crossing points, the fourth sequence is also exact. In this paper, we trace such a diagram and analyze the relation between the kernels and the images, in the case that the fourth sequence is not necessarily exact. Regarding the exactness of the fourth sequence, we remark that the exactness of the other three sequences does guarantee the exactness of the fourth at noncrossing points. As to a crossing point p, we need the extra criterion that the fourth sequence is differential. One notices that the condition, for the fourth sequence, that kernel ⊇ image at p turns out to be equivalent to the “opposite” condition kernel ⊆ image. Next, for the kernel and the image at p of the fourth sequence, even though they may not coincide, they are not far different—they always have the same cardinality as sets, and become isomorphic after taking quotients by a subgroup which is common to both. We demonstrate these phenomena with an example.
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/IJMMS.2005.155
work_keys_str_mv AT peterhilton furtherremarksonsystemsofinterlockingexactsequences
AT cjoannasu furtherremarksonsystemsofinterlockingexactsequences
_version_ 1725435579654471680