Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-hfldf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T16:57:57.162Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Distributive Ockham algebras: free algebras and injectivity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 April 2009

Moshe S. Goldberg
Moshe S. Goldberg
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria 3083, Australia.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

This paper centres around the variety 0 of distributive Ockham algebras, and those subvarieties of 0 which are generated by a single finite subdirectly irreducible algebra A. We use H.A. Priestley's duality for bounded distributive lattices throughout. First, intrinsic descriptions of the duals of certain finite subdirectly irreducibles are given; these are later used to determine projectives in the dual categories. Next, left adjoints to the forgetful functors from 0 and Var(A) into bounded distributive lattices are obtained, thereby allowing us to describe all free algebras and coproducts of arbitrary algebras. Finally, by applying the duality, we characterize injectivity in Var(A) for each finite subdirectly irreducible algebra A.

Type
Research Article
Information
Bulletin of the Australian Mathematical Society , Volume 24 , Issue 2 , October 1981 , pp. 161 - 203
Copyright
Copyright © Australian Mathematical Society 1981

References

[1]Balbes, Raymond and Dwinger, Philip, Distributive lattices (University of Missouri Press, Columbia, 1974).Google Scholar
[2]Banaschewski, B., “Injectivity and essential extensions in equational classes of algebras”,Proceedings of the Conference on Universal Algebra,October 1969, 131–147 (Queen's Papers in Pure and Applied Mathematics, 25. Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, 1970).Google Scholar
[3]Berman, Joel, “Distributive lattices with an additional unary operation”, Aequationes Math. 16 (1977), 165–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Białynicki-Birula, A., “Remarks on quasi-Boolean algebras”, Bull. Acad. Polon. Sci. Cl. III 5 (1957), 615–619.Google Scholar
[5]Bialynicki-Birula, A. and Rasiowa, H., “On the representation of quasi-Boolean algebras”, Bull. Acad. Polon. Sci. Cl. III 5 (1957), 259–261.Google Scholar
[6]Białynicki-Birula, A. and Rasiowa, H., “On constructible falsity in the constructive logic with strong negation”, Colloq. Math. 6 (1958), 287–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Cignoli, Roberto, “Injective De Morgan and Kleene algebras”, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 47 (1975), 269–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8]Cornish, William H., “Monoids acting on distributive lattices”, manuscript.Google Scholar
[9]Cornish, William H. and Fowler, Peter R., “Coproducts of De Morgan algebras”, Bull. Austral. Math. Soc. 16 (1977), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10]Davey, Brian A. and Goldberg, Moshe S., “The free p-algebra generated by a distributive lattice”, Algebra Universalis 11 (1980), 90–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[11]Davey, Brian A. and Werner, Heinrich, “Injectivity and Boolean powers”, Math. Z. 166 (1979), 205–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12]Day, Alan, “Injectivity in equational classes of algebras”, Canad. J. Math. 24 (1972), 209–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13]Dugundji, J., Topology, 9th printing (Allyn and Bacon, Boston, Massachusetts, 1975.Google Scholar
[14]Fraleigh, John B., A first course in abstract algebra (Addison–Wesley, Reading, London, Don Mills, 1967. 2nd edition, 1976).Google Scholar
[15]Gillman, Leonard and Jerison, Meyer, Rings of continuous functions (Van Nostrand, Princeton, Toronto, London, 1960).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[16]Grätzer, George, Lattice theory. First concepts and distributive lattices (Freeman, San Francisco, 1971).Google Scholar
[17]Jónsson, Bjarni, “Algebras whose congruence lattices are distributive”, Math. Scand. 21 (1967), 110–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[18]Kalman, J.A., “Lattices with involution”, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 87 (1958), 485–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[19]Moisil, G.C., “Recherches sur l'algèbre de la logique”, Ann. Sci. Univ. Jassy 22 (1936), 1–118.Google Scholar
[20]Monteiro, Antonio, “Matrices de Morgan caractéristiques pour le calcul propositional classique”, An Acad. Brasil Ci. 52 (1960), 1–7.Google Scholar
[21]Priestley, H.A., “Representation of distributive lattices by means of ordered Stone spaces”, Bull. London Math. Soc. 2 (1970), 186–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[22]Priestley, H.A., “Ordered topological spaces and the representation of distributive lattices”, Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 24 (1972), 507–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[23]Urguhart, Alasdair, “Distributive lattices with a dual homomorphic operation”, Studia Logica 38 (1979), 201–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[24]Walker, Russell C., The Stone-Čech compactification (Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete, 83. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar