MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Let $M$ be a meet-semilattice with a least element $0$. Suppose there is an order-reversing involution $a \mapsto -a$ on $M$ such that for all $a, b \in M$, $a \wedge b = 0$ if and only if $b \le -a$. Then $M$ is a Boolean algebra.

Is there a paper/book I can cite for this claim? The proof I have is just ploughing through with symbolic manipulation to show it is a distributive complemented lattice, but it's probably not something people want to read in a group theory paper. Alternatively, does anyone know a more conceptual or slick proof?

share|cite|improve this question
I haven't thought about this carefully, but are you sure that the noncrossing partition lattice of rank 3 doesn't also satisfy all your conditions? – Patricia Hersh Aug 30 '12 at 0:20
Todd Trimble has pointed out to me that this does not give a counterexample. You can find a picture of this example at Good luck with your work! – Patricia Hersh Aug 30 '12 at 11:50
up vote 4 down vote accepted

I have a pretty simple proof. As Tom has already observed, we have a bounded lattice. Now one characterization of Boolean algebra is a (bounded) lattice such that for every element $a$ there is an element $-a$ such that

$$a \wedge b \leq c \qquad iff \qquad a \leq -b \vee c$$

In category-speak, notice that the poset map $(-) \wedge b$ has a right adjoint $-b \vee (-)$. This immediately implies that $(-) \wedge b$ distributes over any joins that exist.

So let's check that this iff condition holds. Under the hypotheses, the left side is equivalent to saying

$$a \wedge b \wedge -c = 0.$$

Similarly, the right-hand side says $a \wedge -(-b \vee c) = 0$. But according to the characterization of joins, we can rewrite this as $a \wedge b \wedge -c = 0$, and we are done.

Edit: One reference is the nLab. Alternatively, notice that combining Tom's observation with mine shows that we have a complemented distributive lattice.

share|cite|improve this answer
If it helps at all, the iff condition says precisely that a Boolean algebra is a Heyting algebra for which $p \to q = \neq p \vee q$. I'm sure this must be in thousands of places, but see for example: – Todd Trimble Aug 30 '12 at 2:06
Sorry, $\neq$ should be replaced by $\neg$. – Todd Trimble Aug 30 '12 at 2:06
Yes, this is exactly the sort of proof I was looking for. – Colin Reid Aug 30 '12 at 5:33
+1 for taking the time to figure out what was wrong with my suggestion, in addition to giving a proof. – Patricia Hersh Aug 30 '12 at 13:47
@Patricia: no problem! – Todd Trimble Aug 30 '12 at 14:08

Edit: Patricia Hersh points out in the comments that I didn't prove it was a Boolean algebra: I only showed that it was a complemented lattice. But maybe this fragment is useful, so I'll leave it here.

Write $M^{\mathrm{op}}$ for $M$ with the reverse ordering. Since the negation map $a \mapsto -a$ is an order-reversing involution, it defines an isomorphism $M^\mathrm{op} \to M$. But $M$ is a meet-semilattice with least element, so $M$ is also a join-semilattice with greatest element. Hence $M$ is a lattice (bounded, if that's not already in your definition of "lattice"). Moreover, the isomorphism $a \mapsto -a$ interchanges joins and meets, i.e. the de Morgan laws hold.

Taking $b = -a$ in your condition, we have $a \wedge (-a) = 0$ for all $a$. But by the de Morgan laws, we also have the dual of your condition: $a \vee b = 1$ if and only if $-b \leq a$. Taking $a = -b$ in this dual condition gives $(-b) \vee b = 1$ for all $b$, as required.

share|cite|improve this answer
Tom, how does this imply $M$ is a Boolean algebra? It seems like e.g. the noncrossing partition lattice of rank 3 also meets the conditions you've proven. Thanks for your help. – Patricia Hersh Aug 30 '12 at 0:51
Oh, oops. I just forgot that Boolean algebras had to be distributive. Thanks! I don't know what the noncrossing partition lattice of rank 3 looks like - could you describe it in an answer? – Tom Leinster Aug 30 '12 at 1:01

The follwing theorem proven by O. Frink in Pseudo-complements in semi-lattices, Duke Math. J. 1962, Vol. 29, may help:

If $\langle S;\wedge,-\rangle$ is a pseudo-complemented meet-semilattice, then the subset $B(S):=${$-x:x\in S$} with the order inherited from $S$ is a boolean algebra.( A proof of this result can also be found in Grätzer's General Lattice Theory.)

As $-$ is a pseudo-complement on $S$ we have by definition $a\wedge b=0$ iff $b\leq -a$. This implies $a\leq b\rightarrow -a\geq -b$ and $---a=-a$. Therefore $a\mapsto -a$ is an order-reversing involution on $B(S)$.

In your case we have $B(M)=M$ since $--a=a$ for all $a\in M$. Therefore, $M$ is a boolean algebra.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.