Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

• Username
• Password
• Remember me

• Sign in using OpenID
• Remember me

• Forgot your password?
• Apply for membership

2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry book bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive cosmology definitions deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration foundation foundations functional-analysis functor gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry graph graphs gravity grothendieck group group-theory harmonic-analysis higher higher-algebra higher-category-theory higher-differential-geometry higher-geometry higher-lie-theory higher-topos-theory homological homological-algebra homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology nforum nlab noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pages pasting philosophy physics pro-object probability probability-theory quantization quantum quantum-field quantum-field-theory quantum-mechanics quantum-physics quantum-theory question representation representation-theory riemannian-geometry scheme schemes set set-theory sheaf simplicial space spin-geometry stable-homotopy-theory stack string string-theory superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory tqft type type-theory universal variational-calculus

1. • CommentRowNumber1.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeNov 15th 2020
   • (edited Nov 15th 2020)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexIn reaction to discussion in [this thread](https://nforum.ncatlab.org/discussion/11876/what-is-the-actual-groupoid-cardinality-of-the-2d-hypercomplex-number-systems/?Focus=87703#Comment_87703): I have changed the relevant text in the entry now to the following: > Notice that the [[complex numbers]] have 2 distinct [[continuous function|continuous]] [[automorphisms]], given, over $\mathbb{R}$, by $e \mapsto \pm e$ (see at _[[automorphism of the complex numbers]]_). > On the other hand, the [[ring of dual numbers]] has a continuous automorphism $e \mapsto k e$ for each $k \in \mathbb{R} \setminus \{0\}$. But the latter space is [[homotopy equivalence|homotopy equivalent]] to two points, corresponding to the [[connected components]] of, again, $e \mapsto \pm e$. > Maybe $e \mapsto \pm e$ are also the two non-trivial continuous automorphisms of the [[perplex numbers]]. > If that is the case, one could say that the [[Euler characteristic]] of the space of continuous automorphisms of each 2d hypercomplex number systems is 2. And maybe with a bit of handwaving towards _[[groupoid cardinality]]_ one might summarize this in saying that there are 3/2 2d hypercomplex number systems. Here I have added the qualifier "continuous" in order to rule out wild automorphisms of the complex numbers. This is not necessary if we demand the automorphism to be over $\mathbb{R}$, but maybe we don't want to demand that here. And given our experience here, I added some verbal scare quotes to the statement that the perplex numbers have precisely two (continuous?) automorphisms. Probably this is unnecessary, but I haven't thought about it. If anyone has, please be invited to edit the entry and strengthen the statement. <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/hypercomplex+number/7">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/hypercomplex+number/7">v7</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/hypercomplex+number">current</a>

   In reaction to discussion in this thread:

   I have changed the relevant text in the entry now to the following:

   Notice that the complex numbers have 2 distinct continuous automorphisms, given, over $\mathbb{R}$, by $e \mapsto \pm e$ (see at automorphism of the complex numbers).

   On the other hand, the ring of dual numbers has a continuous automorphism $e \mapsto k e$ for each $k \in \mathbb{R} \setminus \{0\}$. But the latter space is homotopy equivalent to two points, corresponding to the connected components of, again, $e \mapsto \pm e$.

   Maybe $e \mapsto \pm e$ are also the two non-trivial continuous automorphisms of the perplex numbers.

   If that is the case, one could say that the Euler characteristic of the space of continuous automorphisms of each 2d hypercomplex number systems is 2. And maybe with a bit of handwaving towards groupoid cardinality one might summarize this in saying that there are 3/2 2d hypercomplex number systems.

   Here I have added the qualifier “continuous” in order to rule out wild automorphisms of the complex numbers. This is not necessary if we demand the automorphism to be over $\mathbb{R}$, but maybe we don’t want to demand that here.

   And given our experience here, I added some verbal scare quotes to the statement that the perplex numbers have precisely two (continuous?) automorphisms. Probably this is unnecessary, but I haven’t thought about it. If anyone has, please be invited to edit the entry and strengthen the statement.

   diff, v7, current

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeNov 15th 2020
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexAdded the argument that the perplex numbers have two automorphisms (from the discussion [here](https://nforum.ncatlab.org/discussion/11876/what-is-the-actual-groupoid-cardinality-of-the-2d-hypercomplex-number-systems/?Focus=87746#Comment_87746)). Adjusted the following sentence accordingly (and fixed the grammar of the next one). <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/hypercomplex+number/9">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/hypercomplex+number/9">v9</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/hypercomplex+number">current</a>

   Added the argument that the perplex numbers have two automorphisms (from the discussion here).

   Adjusted the following sentence accordingly (and fixed the grammar of the next one).

   diff, v9, current