Not signed in (Sign In)

Start a new discussion

Not signed in

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

  • Sign in using OpenID

Site Tag Cloud

2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories accessible adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry 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 deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration foundation foundations functional-analysis functor galois-theory 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 history 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 newpage nlab noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number 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 string string-theory superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory type type-theory universal variational-calculus

Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to nForum
If you want to take part in these discussions either sign in now (if you have an account), apply for one now (if you don't).
    • CommentRowNumber1.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 29th 2010

    created hyperring

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeJul 1st 2010

    Corrected the proposition about the structure of Hom([X],S)Hom(\mathbb{Z}[X], \mathbf{S}).

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJul 1st 2010

    Ah, thanks for fixing that. I had put the statement the way Connes said it in his talk, but evidently that was without some fine print.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeJul 1st 2010

    Added that we can form many examples of hyperrings by quotienting a ring RR by a subgroup GR ×G \subset R^{\times} of its multiplicative group.

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorzskoda
    • CommentTimeJul 14th 2010
    • (edited Jul 14th 2010)

    John says here that the hypersemigroup is a monoid object in the category of sets and multivalued functions. Sounds the way I like, but I do not understand. I mean what is the monoidal product in the category of sets and multivalued functions (I guess a cartesian product, but what is its description in elementwise terms) ? Sounds like a student exercise but I would rather not blunder into possibly wrong attempts now.

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeJul 15th 2010

    I think the monoidal structure is the ordinary cartesian product of sets, which is however not the cartesian product in the category of sets and multivalued functions.

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeJul 15th 2010

    It’s probably high time that all these notions got sussed out properly, because certain aspects of hypergroup and hyperring as so far presented have an ad hoc look to them. These could probably be clarified by placing them in the context of the cartesian bicategory of relations and the cartesian monoidal subbicategory of functions.

    But to answer the immediate question: a multivalued function from AA to BB is just a relation from AA to BB, and we are working in the bicategory of sets and relations. The monoidal structure is given by cartesian product of sets as you surmise, and the tensor product of relations R:ABR: A \to B, S:CDS: C \to D is the relation R×S:A×CB×DR \times S: A \times C \to B \times D defined by

    (R×S)((a,c),(b,d))=R(a,b)S(c,d)(R \times S)((a, c), (b, d)) = R(a, b) \wedge S(c, d)

    This is a monoidal product (in the world of poset-enriched categories, or of 2-categories if you prefer), but not a cartesian monoidal product. Of course, we can define monoids in any monoidal category, so John’s formulation makes sense.

    (Apparently the hypergroup experts intend “multivalued” to mean “at least one value”, so here we are talking about total relations. But that’s okay: it’s clear that the monoidal product as defined above restricts to the bicategory of total relations.)

    Another way of thinking about all this is that we’re working in the full (poset-enriched) subcategory of the monoidal category of sup-lattices and cocontinuous maps whose objects are power sets. A monoid in the monoidal category of sup-lattices is usually called a (noncommutative) quantale, so John’s definition boils down to a quantale structure on a power object, except that we must restrict to total relations.

    The funny thing is: I can’t seem to rummage up many interesting examples of total power quantales off the top of my head! There seems to be a paucity of examples over at hyperring, and it leads me to wonder what can be said about the finite examples. Can these be classified, or if not, can be easily produce a rich supply of them?

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeJul 15th 2010

    Actually, now that I think further, I believe one interesting example would be the Boolean Hecke algebra of a Coxeter group, which Jim Dolan and I were discussing a few years back. This would be worth putting on the Lab.

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeJul 15th 2010
    • (edited Jul 15th 2010)

    Hm, there is no extant entry for hypersemigroup or hypermonoid, and it’s not clear we want or need to create one. So I’ll just record the example here for now.

    Let WW be a finite Coxeter group. A Coxeter group is really a group presentation, with a collection of involutive generators s 1,,s ns_1, \ldots, s_n and whose relations are of the form , where m ijm_{i j} is a collection of integers specified by a Coxeter diagram or Coxeter matrix (assumed to be symmetric and with 1’s down the diagonal). We may rewrite the presentation as

    s i 2=1,s is j=s js is_{i}^{2} = 1, \qquad s_i s_j \ldots = s_j s_i \ldots

    where the words on either side of the second equation alternate between s is_i and s js_j (for distinct ii and jj) and have length m ijm_{i j}.

    The Boolean Hecke algebra of a Coxeter group WW is a quantale whose underlying sup-lattice is PWP W, and whose quantalic multiplication is uniquely determined by a hypermonoid structure which satisfies

    s i 2={s i,1}s_{i}^{2} = \{s_i, 1\}

    and described roughly as follows: given two reduced words w 1w_1, w 2w_2 in the Coxeter group representation, put the word w 1w 2w_1 w_2 into reduced form, resolving any occurrences of s i 2s_{i}^2 that occur according to the equation above. Now group elements gWg \in W are equivalence classes of reduced words, and the recipe above actually gives a well-defined map W×WP(W)W \times W \to P(W) that gives a hypermonoid structure.

    The way I just portrayed it makes it seem very combinatorial and dependent on the theory of rewriting systems, but is can be made more conceptual if the Coxeter group WW is seen as coming from a BN-pair. How this usually works is that “B” is a Borel subgroup of a simple algebraic group GG and “N” is the normalizer of a maximal torus. The basic idea then is that the Boolean Hecke algebra is the algebra consisting of GG-equivariant Boolean algebra maps

    P(G/B)P(G/B)P(G/B) \to P(G/B)

    which as a sup-lattice is isomorphic to P(B\G/B)P(B\backslash G/B), the power set of the set of double cosets. (Since such equivariant maps compose, this imparts a quantale structure to P(B\G/B)P(B\backslash G/B).) When I refer to WW “coming from” a BN-pair, I mean according to some general theory that these double cosets are in bijection with the elements of some Coxeter group WW. Hence P(W)P(B\G/B)P(W) \cong P(B\backslash G/B), but the algebra structure on P(B\G/B)P(B \backslash G/B) can be regarded as a deformation of the group algebra structure.

    This example of a hypermonoid deserves to be discussed at much greater length, but not necessarily under hypermonoid.

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorzskoda
    • CommentTimeJul 15th 2010

    Great answers! My personal opinion is that long term it would be good to have separate entries hypermonoid, hypersemigroup, hyperfield in addition to the present hyperring. It seems that the subject is becoming important.

    • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJul 15th 2010

    This example of a hypermonoid deserves to be discussed at much greater length, but not necessarily under hypermonoid.

    Just please don’t forget to put it somewhere on the nnLab. Why not at hypermonoid? You can still move it later.

    • CommentRowNumber12.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeJul 15th 2010

    Okay, I just did that Urs.

Add your comments
  • Please log in or leave your comment as a "guest post". If commenting as a "guest", please include your name in the message as a courtesy. Note: only certain categories allow guest posts.
  • To produce a hyperlink to an nLab entry, simply put double square brackets around its name, e.g. [[category]]. To use (La)TeX mathematics in your post, make sure Markdown+Itex is selected below and put your mathematics between dollar signs as usual. Only a subset of the usual TeX math commands are accepted: see here for a list.

  • (Help)