Let
F :
J →
C be a
diagram in
C. Formally, a diagram is nothing more than a
functor from
J to
C. The change in terminology reflects the fact that we think of
F as indexing a family of
objects and
morphisms in
C. The
category J is thought of as an "index category". One should consider this in analogy with the concept of an
indexed family of objects in
set theory. The primary difference is that here we have morphisms as well. Thus, for example, when
J is a
discrete category, it corresponds most closely to the idea of an indexed family in set theory. Another common and more interesting example takes
J to be a
span.
J can also be taken to be the empty category, leading to the simplest cones. Let
N be an object of
C. A
cone from
N to
F is a family of morphisms :\psi_X\colon N \to F(X)\, for each object
X of
J, such that for every morphism
f :
X →
Y in
J the following diagram
commutes: The (usually infinite) collection of all these triangles can be (partially) depicted in the shape of a
cone with the apex
N. The cone ψ is sometimes said to have
vertex N and
base F. One can also define the
dual notion of a
cone from
F to
N (also called a
co-cone) by reversing all the arrows above. Explicitly, a co-cone from
F to
N is a family of morphisms :\psi_X\colon F(X)\to N\, for each object
X of
J, such that for every morphism
f :
X →
Y in
J the following diagram commutes: ==Equivalent formulations==