There is the potential for confusing morphisms with paths.

**(3.7) in Example 3.6 and [Exercise 3.7](https://forum.azimuthproject.org/discussion/2134)**

\\( \mathcal{N} = \textbf{Free} ( \\) ![diagram](https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/e/2PACX-1vSNq8tGaSP6a6b5IEKXbFSWVhXVfLV5_JgG6Dmk8Awd7BTesSBvq3DKftqXOf93k_NMZbc0Z_7IV0pS/pub?w=120&h=146) \\( ) \\)

Has many paths, \\(\aleph_0\\), each of which is a distinct morphism.

If we add equations the number of morphisms can be limited.

Regarding [comment 4](https://forum.azimuthproject.org/discussion/comment/18689/#Comment_18689) if two paths produce the same result they are the same morphism.

**(3.7) in Example 3.6 and [Exercise 3.7](https://forum.azimuthproject.org/discussion/2134)**

\\( \mathcal{N} = \textbf{Free} ( \\) ![diagram](https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/e/2PACX-1vSNq8tGaSP6a6b5IEKXbFSWVhXVfLV5_JgG6Dmk8Awd7BTesSBvq3DKftqXOf93k_NMZbc0Z_7IV0pS/pub?w=120&h=146) \\( ) \\)

Has many paths, \\(\aleph_0\\), each of which is a distinct morphism.

If we add equations the number of morphisms can be limited.

Regarding [comment 4](https://forum.azimuthproject.org/discussion/comment/18689/#Comment_18689) if two paths produce the same result they are the same morphism.