Sylow Theory for Quasigroups Ii: Sectional Action

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Sylow Theory for Quasigroups Ii: Sectional Action SYLOW THEORY FOR QUASIGROUPS II: SECTIONAL ACTION MICHAEL K. KINYON1, JONATHAN D. H. SMITH2, AND PETR VOJTECHOVSKˇ Y´ 3 Abstract. The first paper in this series initiated a study of Sy- low theory for quasigroups and Latin squares, based on orbits of the left multiplication group. The current paper is based on so- called pseudo-orbits, which are formed by the images of a subset under the set of left translations. The two approaches agree for groups, but differ in the general case. Subsets are described as sectional if the pseudo-orbit that they generate actually partitions the quasigroup. Sectional subsets are especially well-behaved in the newly identified class of conflatable quasigroups, which pro- vides a unified treatment of Moufang, Bol, and conjugacy-closure properties. Relationships between sectional and Lagrangean prop- erties of subquasigroups are established. Structural implications of sectional properties in loops are investigated, and divisors of the order of a finite quasigroup are classified according to the behavior of sectional subsets and pseudo-orbits. An upper bound is given on the size of a pseudo-orbit. Various interactions of the Sylow theory with design theory are discussed. In particular, it is shown how Sylow theory yields readily computable isomorphism invari- ants with the resolving power to distinguish each of the 80 Steiner triple systems of order 15. 1. Introduction This paper is part of a research program to extend Sylow theory from finite groups to finite quasigroups and Latin squares. General approaches to the extension have been both top-down and bottom- up. The top-down approach works with the Burnside order, a labeled 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 20N05, 05B07. Key words and phrases. Latin square, quasigroup, Sylow theorem, Moufang loop, loop coset, Steiner triple system. Work on this paper was begun while the second author enjoyed the hospital- ity of the Department of Mathematics, University of Denver, partially supported by the Simons Foundation under the auspices of Collaboration Grant 210176 to P. Vojtˇechovsk´y. 1 2 M.K. KINYON, J.D.H. SMITH, AND P. VOJTECHOVSKˇ Y´ order structure on the set of isomorphism classes of irreducible permu- tation representations of a quasigroup [19, xx10{13]. The bottom-up approach, which is modeled on Wielandt's treatment of the Sylow the- ory for groups [22], studies the combinatorial or geometric structure of systems of subsets of a quasigroup. In a predecessor paper, the systems studied were the orbits of a given subset under the full left multiplica- tion group of the quasigroup [19, xx5{9]. In the current paper, which again works solely with the bottom-up approach, the systems studied are the images of a subset under the set of left multiplications by ele- ments of the quasigroup. For groups, these two versions of the bottom- up approach coincide, but they separate for general quasigroups. If S is a subset of a quasigroup Q, then the pseudo-orbit generated by S is the system fSL(q) j q 2 Qg of images of S under the left multiplications L(q) by elements q of Q (see Example 2.2). The left multiplications are the permutations represented by the rows of the Latin square forming the body of the bordered multiplication table. The images under the left multiplications are the cosets that appeared in [13], but here they are described as left translates. A subset S is said to be sectional if the pseudo-orbit it generates forms a partition of Q. Note that in the finite case, a nonempty subset S is sectional if and only if the columns indexed by S in the multiplica- tion table of Q can be partitioned into jQj=jSj pairwise disjoint Latin subsquares of order jSj. In Wielandt's approach to the Sylow theory for groups, p-subgroups of a finite group Q (for a prime p) appear in the pseudo-orbits of sectional subsets of p-power order. The basic properties of pseudo- orbits and sectional subsets are studied in Section 2. One of the primary motivations for the extension of Sylow theory to quasigroups is the insight that the extension provides into various aspects of quasigroup theory, and the way that it leads to a unification of these diverse aspects. This effect is seen clearly in Section 3, which investigates when each element of the orbit of a subset under the full left multiplication group is actually sectional. Theorem 3.7 shows that this happens within the class of (left) conflatable quasigroups Q, satisfying the property 8 x 2 Q; 9 αx 2 Q! : 8 y 2 Q;L(x)L(y)αx 2 L(Q) | compare (3.1). Conflatable quasigroups form the framework for a unified treatment of various classes of quasigroups and loops that have appeared in the literature, such as Moufang loops, Bol quasigroups, conjugacy-closed loops, and distributive quasigroups. SECTIONAL ACTION 3 Section 4 investigates the relationships between the sectional and Lagrangean properties for subquasigroups. The concepts coincide for loops, but differ for general quasigroups. Sufficient conditions for sec- tionality are also given. Section 5 provides a classification of the divi- sors d of the order of a finite quasigroup, based on the behavior of the pseudo-orbits of subsets of size d. This classification is correlated with the classification from [19], which was based on the behavior of orbits under the full left multiplication group. Theorem 6.5 provides an upper bound for the size of the pseudo- orbit of a (non-sectional) subgroup of a quasigroup, in terms of the semilattice of subgroups containing the given subgroup. This bound is sharp, for example, when applied to Klein 4-subgroups of the smallest simple, non-associative Moufang loop, the Paige loop PSL1;3(2) of order 120 [17]. The concluding Sections 7 and 8 offer applications and illustrations of the current Sylow theory in design theory and loop theory respectively. In particular, x7.1 shows how Sylow theory produces readily computed invariants that are powerful enough to distinguish each of the 80 Steiner triple systems of order 15 (compare Table 4 and [6, Table II.1.28]). Readers are referred to [18] and [20] for quasigroup-theoretic and general algebraic concepts and conventions that are not otherwise ex- plicitly clarified here. 2. Pseudo-orbits and sectional subsets A quasigroup Q is a set with a binary operation · such that the equation x·y = z has a unique solution in Q whenever two of the three elements x, y, z of Q are specified. This is equivalent to saying that the left multiplications L(q): Q ! Q; x 7! qx and the right multiplications R(q): Q ! Q; x 7! xq by each element q of Q are bijections of Q. In particular, unlabeled multiplication tables of finite quasigroups (which we will employ throughout the paper and whose rows and columns we tacitly label 1, ::: , jQj) are precisely Latin squares. We also set ynx = xL(y)−1, and x=y = xR(y)−1 for elements x; y of a quasigroup Q. Finally, a loop is defined as a quasigroup Q with an identity element 1 2 Q satisfying 1 · x = x · 1 = x for all x 2 Q. 2.1. Pseudo-orbits. Definition 2.1. Let S be a subset of a quasigroup Q. Then fSL(q) j q 2 Qg is called the (left) pseudo-orbit generated by S in Q. Its elements are described as (left) translates of S in Q. 4 M.K. KINYON, J.D.H. SMITH, AND P. VOJTECHOVSKˇ Y´ Example 2.2. Consider the quasigroup with multiplication table 1 2 3 4 5 6 2 1 4 5 6 3 3 4 5 6 1 2 4 6 2 1 3 5 5 3 6 2 4 1 6 5 1 3 2 4 { } The set f1; 3g, f1; 6g, f2; 4g, f3; 5g, f5; 6g is the pseudo-orbit of f1; 3g. We begin with an elementary observation. Lemma 2.3. Let S be a non-empty subset of a quasigroup Q. Then the pseudo-orbit generated by S is a cover of Q. Proof. Let s be an element of S, and let x be an element of Q. Then x = (x=s)s lies in the translate SL(x=s) of S. Note that common membership in a pseudo-orbit is not a transitive relation. More specifically, define a relation ∼ on subsets of a quasi- group Q by S1 ∼ S2 , 9 S ⊆ Q: 9 q1; q2 2 Q:S1 = q1S and S2 = q2S: Certainly, ∼ is symmetric. Lemma 2.4. Let Q be a quasigroup. Then the relation ∼ is reflexive. Proof. If Q is empty, the result is immediate. Otherwise, let S1 be a −1 subset of Q. For an element q of Q, consider S = S1L(q) . Then S1 = SL(q), so S1 ∼ S1. In general, ∼ is not a transitive relation. For instance, in the quasi- group of Example 2.2, we have f1; 2; 3g ∼ f1; 2; 4g ∼ f1; 2; 5g, but f1; 2; 3g f1; 2; 5g. Recall that for a quasigroup Q, the left multiplication group LMlt Q of Q is the permutation group hL(q) j q 2 QiQ! of the underlying set Q generated by the full set fL(q) j q 2 Qg of left multiplications by elements of Q. Proposition 2.5. If two subsets of a quasigroup Q are related by the transitive closure of ∼, then they lie in the same orbit under the left multiplication group LMlt Q. SECTIONAL ACTION 5 Proof. Suppose that S and S0 lie in the transitive closure of ∼, and are thus related by a chain of the form 0 (2.1) S = S0 ∼ S1 ∼ · · · ∼ Sr = S : It will be shown by induction on r that S0 lies in the LMlt Q-orbit of S.
Recommended publications
  • Arxiv:Math/9907085V3 [Math.GR] 25 Feb 2000 Dniy1 Identity Okwt Rnvras Ecnie H Eainhpbtentelo the Between Relationship the Consider B We Set Transversals
    LOOPS AND SEMIDIRECT PRODUCTS MICHAEL K. KINYON AND OLIVER JONES 1. Introduction A left loop (B, ·) is a set B together with a binary operation · such that (i) for each a ∈ B, the mapping x 7−→ a · x is a bijection, and (ii) there exists a two-sided identity 1 ∈ B satisfying 1 · x = x · 1= x for every x ∈ B. A right loop is similarly defined, and a loop is both a right loop and a left loop [5] [6]. In this paper we study semidirect products of loops with groups. This is a generalization of the familiar semidirect product of groups. Recall that if G is a group with subgroups B and H where B is normal, G = BH, and B ∩ H = {1}, then G is said to be an internal semidirect product of B with H. On the other hand, if B and H are groups and σ : H → Aut(B): h 7→ σh is a homomorphism, then the external semidirect product of B with H given by σ, denoted B ⋊σ H, is the set B × H with the multiplication (1.1) (a,h)(b, k) = (a · σh(b), hk). A special case of this is the standard semidirect product where H is a subgroup of the automorphism group of B, and σ is the inclusion mapping. The relationship between internal, external and standard semidirect products is well known. These considerations can be generalized to loops. We now describe the contents of the sequel. In §2, we consider the natural embedding of a left loop B into its permuta- tion group Sym(B).
    [Show full text]
  • ON F-DERIVATIONS from SEMILATTICES to LATTICES
    Commun. Korean Math. Soc. 29 (2014), No. 1, pp. 27–36 http://dx.doi.org/10.4134/CKMS.2014.29.1.027 ON f-DERIVATIONS FROM SEMILATTICES TO LATTICES Yong Ho Yon and Kyung Ho Kim Abstract. In this paper, we introduce the notion of f-derivations from a semilattice S to a lattice L, as a generalization of derivation and f- derivation of lattices. Also, we define the simple f-derivation from S to L, and research the properties of them and the conditions for a lattice L to be distributive. Finally, we prove that a distributive lattice L is isomorphic to the class SDf (S,L) of all simple f-derivations on S to L for every ∧-homomorphism f : S → L such that f(x0) ∨ f(y0) = 1 for ∼ some x0,y0 ∈ S, in particular, L = SDf (S,L) for every ∧-homomorphism f : S → L such that f(x0) = 1 for some x0 ∈ S. 1. Introduction In some of the literature, authors investigated the relationship between the notion of modularity or distributivity and the special operators on lattices such as derivations, multipliers and linear maps. The notion and some properties of derivations on lattices were introduced in [10, 11]. Sz´asz ([10, 11]) characterized the distributive lattices by multipliers and derivations: a lattice is distributive if and only if the set of all meet- multipliers and of all derivations coincide. In [5] it was shown that every derivation on a lattice is a multiplier and every multiplier is a dual closure. Pataki and Sz´az ([9]) gave a connection between non-expansive multipliers and quasi-interior operators.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Linear Bialgebra
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of New Mexico University of New Mexico UNM Digital Repository Mathematics and Statistics Faculty and Staff Publications Academic Department Resources 2005 INTRODUCTION TO LINEAR BIALGEBRA Florentin Smarandache University of New Mexico, [email protected] W.B. Vasantha Kandasamy K. Ilanthenral Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/math_fsp Part of the Algebra Commons, Analysis Commons, Discrete Mathematics and Combinatorics Commons, and the Other Mathematics Commons Recommended Citation Smarandache, Florentin; W.B. Vasantha Kandasamy; and K. Ilanthenral. "INTRODUCTION TO LINEAR BIALGEBRA." (2005). https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/math_fsp/232 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Academic Department Resources at UNM Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Mathematics and Statistics Faculty and Staff Publications by an authorized administrator of UNM Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]. INTRODUCTION TO LINEAR BIALGEBRA W. B. Vasantha Kandasamy Department of Mathematics Indian Institute of Technology, Madras Chennai – 600036, India e-mail: [email protected] web: http://mat.iitm.ac.in/~wbv Florentin Smarandache Department of Mathematics University of New Mexico Gallup, NM 87301, USA e-mail: [email protected] K. Ilanthenral Editor, Maths Tiger, Quarterly Journal Flat No.11, Mayura Park, 16, Kazhikundram Main Road, Tharamani, Chennai – 600 113, India e-mail: [email protected] HEXIS Phoenix, Arizona 2005 1 This book can be ordered in a paper bound reprint from: Books on Demand ProQuest Information & Learning (University of Microfilm International) 300 N.
    [Show full text]
  • On Free Quasigroups and Quasigroup Representations Stefanie Grace Wang Iowa State University
    Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Graduate Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 2017 On free quasigroups and quasigroup representations Stefanie Grace Wang Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd Part of the Mathematics Commons Recommended Citation Wang, Stefanie Grace, "On free quasigroups and quasigroup representations" (2017). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 16298. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd/16298 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. On free quasigroups and quasigroup representations by Stefanie Grace Wang A dissertation submitted to the graduate faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Major: Mathematics Program of Study Committee: Jonathan D.H. Smith, Major Professor Jonas Hartwig Justin Peters Yiu Tung Poon Paul Sacks The student author and the program of study committee are solely responsible for the content of this dissertation. The Graduate College will ensure this dissertation is globally accessible and will not permit alterations after a degree is conferred. Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 2017 Copyright c Stefanie Grace Wang, 2017. All rights reserved. ii DEDICATION I would like to dedicate this dissertation to the Integral Liberal Arts Program. The Program changed my life, and I am forever grateful. It is as Aristotle said, \All men by nature desire to know." And Montaigne was certainly correct as well when he said, \There is a plague on Man: his opinion that he knows something." iii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES .
    [Show full text]
  • Quasigroup Identities and Mendelsohn Designs
    Can. J. Math., Vol. XLI, No. 2, 1989, pp. 341-368 QUASIGROUP IDENTITIES AND MENDELSOHN DESIGNS F. E. BENNETT 1. Introduction. A quasigroup is an ordered pair (g, •), where Q is a set and (•) is a binary operation on Q such that the equations ax — b and ya — b are uniquely solvable for every pair of elements a,b in Q. It is well-known (see, for example, [11]) that the multiplication table of a quasigroup defines a Latin square, that is, a Latin square can be viewed as the multiplication table of a quasigroup with the headline and sideline removed. We are concerned mainly with finite quasigroups in this paper. A quasigroup (<2, •) is called idempotent if the identity x2 = x holds for all x in Q. The spectrum of the two-variable quasigroup identity u(x,y) = v(x,y) is the set of all integers n such that there exists a quasigroup of order n satisfying the identity u(x,y) = v(x,y). It is particularly useful to study the spectrum of certain two-variable quasigroup identities, since such identities are quite often instrumental in the construction or algebraic description of combinatorial designs (see, for example, [1, 22] for a brief survey). If 02? ®) is a quasigroup, we may define on the set Q six binary operations ®(1,2,3),<8)(1,3,2),®(2,1,3),®(2,3,1),(8)(3,1,2), and 0(3,2,1) as follows: a (g) b = c if and only if a <g> (1,2, 3)b = c,a® (1, 3,2)c = 6, b ® (2,1,3)a = c, ft <g> (2,3, l)c = a, c ® (3,1,2)a = ft, c ® (3,2, \)b = a.
    [Show full text]
  • Irreducible Representations of Finite Monoids
    U.U.D.M. Project Report 2019:11 Irreducible representations of finite monoids Christoffer Hindlycke Examensarbete i matematik, 30 hp Handledare: Volodymyr Mazorchuk Examinator: Denis Gaidashev Mars 2019 Department of Mathematics Uppsala University Irreducible representations of finite monoids Christoffer Hindlycke Contents Introduction 2 Theory 3 Finite monoids and their structure . .3 Introductory notions . .3 Cyclic semigroups . .6 Green’s relations . .7 von Neumann regularity . 10 The theory of an idempotent . 11 The five functors Inde, Coinde, Rese,Te and Ne ..................... 11 Idempotents and simple modules . 14 Irreducible representations of a finite monoid . 17 Monoid algebras . 17 Clifford-Munn-Ponizovski˘ıtheory . 20 Application 24 The symmetric inverse monoid . 24 Calculating the irreducible representations of I3 ........................ 25 Appendix: Prerequisite theory 37 Basic definitions . 37 Finite dimensional algebras . 41 Semisimple modules and algebras . 41 Indecomposable modules . 42 An introduction to idempotents . 42 1 Irreducible representations of finite monoids Christoffer Hindlycke Introduction This paper is a literature study of the 2016 book Representation Theory of Finite Monoids by Benjamin Steinberg [3]. As this book contains too much interesting material for a simple master thesis, we have narrowed our attention to chapters 1, 4 and 5. This thesis is divided into three main parts: Theory, Application and Appendix. Within the Theory chapter, we (as the name might suggest) develop the necessary theory to assist with finding irreducible representations of finite monoids. Finite monoids and their structure gives elementary definitions as regards to finite monoids, and expands on the basic theory of their structure. This part corresponds to chapter 1 in [3]. The theory of an idempotent develops just enough theory regarding idempotents to enable us to state a key result, from which the principal result later follows almost immediately.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:2011.04704V2 [Cs.LO] 22 Mar 2021 Eain,Bttre Te Opttoal Neetn Oessuc Models Interesting Well
    Domain Semirings United Uli Fahrenberg1, Christian Johansen2, Georg Struth3, and Krzysztof Ziemia´nski4 1Ecole´ Polytechnique, Palaiseau, France 2 University of Oslo, Norway 3University of Sheffield, UK 4University of Warsaw, Poland Abstract Domain operations on semirings have been axiomatised in two different ways: by a map from an additively idempotent semiring into a boolean subalgebra of the semiring bounded by the additive and multiplicative unit of the semiring, or by an endofunction on a semiring that induces a distributive lattice bounded by the two units as its image. This note presents classes of semirings where these approaches coincide. Keywords: semirings, quantales, domain operations 1 Introduction Domain semirings and Kleene algebras with domain [DMS06, DS11] yield particularly simple program ver- ification formalisms in the style of dynamic logics, algebras of predicate transformers or boolean algebras with operators (which are all related). There are two kinds of axiomatisation. Both are inspired by properties of the domain operation on binary relations, but target other computationally interesting models such as program traces or paths on digraphs as well. The initial two-sorted axiomatisation [DMS06] models the domain operation as a map d : S → B from an additively idempotent semiring (S, +, ·, 0, 1) into a boolean subalgebra B of S bounded by 0 and 1. This seems natural as domain elements form powerset algebras in the target models mentioned. Yet the domain algebra B cannot be chosen freely: B must be the maximal boolean subalgebra of S bounded by 0 and 1 and equal to the set Sd of fixpoints of d in S. The alternative, one-sorted axiomatisation [DS11] therefore models d as an endofunction on a semiring S that induces a suitable domain algebra on Sd—yet generally only a bounded distributive lattice.
    [Show full text]
  • Right Product Quasigroups and Loops
    RIGHT PRODUCT QUASIGROUPS AND LOOPS MICHAEL K. KINYON, ALEKSANDAR KRAPEZˇ∗, AND J. D. PHILLIPS Abstract. Right groups are direct products of right zero semigroups and groups and they play a significant role in the semilattice decomposition theory of semigroups. Right groups can be characterized as associative right quasigroups (magmas in which left translations are bijective). If we do not assume associativity we get right quasigroups which are not necessarily representable as direct products of right zero semigroups and quasigroups. To obtain such a representation, we need stronger assumptions which lead us to the notion of right product quasigroup. If the quasigroup component is a (one-sided) loop, then we have a right product (left, right) loop. We find a system of identities which axiomatizes right product quasigroups, and use this to find axiom systems for right product (left, right) loops; in fact, we can obtain each of the latter by adjoining just one appropriate axiom to the right product quasigroup axiom system. We derive other properties of right product quasigroups and loops, and conclude by show- ing that the axioms for right product quasigroups are independent. 1. Introduction In the semigroup literature (e.g., [1]), the most commonly used definition of right group is a semigroup (S; ·) which is right simple (i.e., has no proper right ideals) and left cancellative (i.e., xy = xz =) y = z). The structure of right groups is clarified by the following well-known representation theorem (see [1]): Theorem 1.1. A semigroup (S; ·) is a right group if and only if it is isomorphic to a direct product of a group and a right zero semigroup.
    [Show full text]
  • Algebras of Boolean Inverse Monoids – Traces and Invariant Means
    C*-algebras of Boolean inverse monoids { traces and invariant means Charles Starling∗ Abstract ∗ To a Boolean inverse monoid S we associate a universal C*-algebra CB(S) and show that it is equal to Exel's tight C*-algebra of S. We then show that any invariant mean on S (in the sense of Kudryavtseva, Lawson, Lenz and Resende) gives rise to a ∗ trace on CB(S), and vice-versa, under a condition on S equivalent to the underlying ∗ groupoid being Hausdorff. Under certain mild conditions, the space of traces of CB(S) is shown to be isomorphic to the space of invariant means of S. We then use many known results about traces of C*-algebras to draw conclusions about invariant means on Boolean inverse monoids; in particular we quote a result of Blackadar to show that any metrizable Choquet simplex arises as the space of invariant means for some AF inverse monoid S. 1 Introduction This article is the continuation of our study of the relationship between inverse semigroups and C*-algebras. An inverse semigroup is a semigroup S for which every element s 2 S has a unique \inverse" s∗ in the sense that ss∗s = s and s∗ss∗ = s∗: An important subsemigroup of any inverse semigroup is its set of idempotents E(S) = fe 2 S j e2 = eg = fs∗s j s 2 Sg. Any set of partial isometries closed under product and arXiv:1605.05189v3 [math.OA] 19 Jul 2016 involution inside a C*-algebra is an inverse semigroup, and its set of idempotents forms a commuting set of projections.
    [Show full text]
  • Binary Opera- Tions, Magmas, Monoids, Groups, Rings, fields and Their Homomorphisms
    1. Introduction In this chapter, I introduce some of the fundamental objects of algbera: binary opera- tions, magmas, monoids, groups, rings, fields and their homomorphisms. 2. Binary Operations Definition 2.1. Let M be a set. A binary operation on M is a function · : M × M ! M often written (x; y) 7! x · y. A pair (M; ·) consisting of a set M and a binary operation · on M is called a magma. Example 2.2. Let M = Z and let + : Z × Z ! Z be the function (x; y) 7! x + y. Then, + is a binary operation and, consequently, (Z; +) is a magma. Example 2.3. Let n be an integer and set Z≥n := fx 2 Z j x ≥ ng. Now suppose n ≥ 0. Then, for x; y 2 Z≥n, x + y 2 Z≥n. Consequently, Z≥n with the operation (x; y) 7! x + y is a magma. In particular, Z+ is a magma under addition. Example 2.4. Let S = f0; 1g. There are 16 = 42 possible binary operations m : S ×S ! S . Therefore, there are 16 possible magmas of the form (S; m). Example 2.5. Let n be a non-negative integer and let · : Z≥n × Z≥n ! Z≥n be the operation (x; y) 7! xy. Then Z≥n is a magma. Similarly, the pair (Z; ·) is a magma (where · : Z×Z ! Z is given by (x; y) 7! xy). Example 2.6. Let M2(R) denote the set of 2 × 2 matrices with real entries. If ! ! a a b b A = 11 12 , and B = 11 12 a21 a22 b21 b22 are two matrices, define ! a b + a b a b + a b A ◦ B = 11 11 12 21 11 12 12 22 : a21b11 + a22b21 a21b12 + a22b22 Then (M2(R); ◦) is a magma.
    [Show full text]
  • The Characteristics of Some Kinds of Special Quasirings *
    ISSN 1746-7659, England, UK Journal of Information and Computing Science Vol. 1, No. 5, 2006, pp. 295-302 The Characteristics of Some Kinds of Special Quasirings * Ping Zhu1, Jinhui Pang 2, Xu-qing Tang3 1 School of Science, Southern Yangtze University, Wuxi, Jiangsu 214122, P. R. China + 2 School of Management & Economics, Beijing Institute Of Technology, Beijing, 100081, P. R. China 3 Key Laboratory of Intelligent Computing &Signal Processing of Ministry of Education, Anhui University, Hefei, 230039, P. R. China ( Received July 02, 2006, Accepted September 11, 2006 ) Abstract. By using quasi-group, we introduce some kinds of special quasi-rings and discuss their characteristics. According to the concept of monogenic semigroup we introduce definition of monogenic semiring and discuss the numbers and structures of monogenic semiring .Then we display their relations as following: Ø {integral domain }(∉ { strong biquasiring }) {}division ring Ø {}({int})strong biquasiring∉ egral domain Ø {}ring ØØØ{}biquasiring {}{} quasiring semiring Ø {}monogenic semiring Keywords: Semiring, Quasiring, Biquasiring, Strong Biquasiring, Monogenic Semiring AMS: Subject Classification (2000): 20M07, 20M10 1. Introduction A semiring[1] S = (S,+,•) is an algebra where both the additive reduct (S,+) and the multiplicative reduct (S,•) are semigroups and such that the following distributive laws hold: x( y + z) = xy + xz, (x + y)z = xz + yz . A semiring (,,)S + • is called a nilsemiring if there are additive idempotent 0 and for any a∈S ,there are n∈N , such that na = 0 . An ideal (prime ideal) of a semiring (S,+,•) is the ideal (prime ideal) of the (S,•). An ideal I of a semiring S is called a K-ideal[1], if ∀a,b ∈ S, a ∈ I and (a + b ∈ I or b + a ∈ I ) ⇒ b ∈ I .
    [Show full text]
  • A Guide to Self-Distributive Quasigroups, Or Latin Quandles
    A GUIDE TO SELF-DISTRIBUTIVE QUASIGROUPS, OR LATIN QUANDLES DAVID STANOVSKY´ Abstract. We present an overview of the theory of self-distributive quasigroups, both in the two- sided and one-sided cases, and relate the older results to the modern theory of quandles, to which self-distributive quasigroups are a special case. Most attention is paid to the representation results (loop isotopy, linear representation, homogeneous representation), as the main tool to investigate self-distributive quasigroups. 1. Introduction 1.1. The origins of self-distributivity. Self-distributivity is such a natural concept: given a binary operation on a set A, fix one parameter, say the left one, and consider the mappings ∗ La(x) = a x, called left translations. If all such mappings are endomorphisms of the algebraic structure (A,∗ ), the operation is called left self-distributive (the prefix self- is usually omitted). Equationally,∗ the property says a (x y) = (a x) (a y) ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ for every a, x, y A, and we see that distributes over itself. Self-distributivity∈ was pinpointed already∗ in the late 19th century works of logicians Peirce and Schr¨oder [69, 76], and ever since, it keeps appearing in a natural way throughout mathematics, perhaps most notably in low dimensional topology (knot and braid invariants) [12, 15, 63], in the theory of symmetric spaces [57] and in set theory (Laver’s groupoids of elementary embeddings) [15]. Recently, Moskovich expressed an interesting statement on his blog [60] that while associativity caters to the classical world of space and time, distributivity is, perhaps, the setting for the emerging world of information.
    [Show full text]