Timeline for A different equivalence relation on partizan combinatorial games
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 15, 2018 at 20:05 | answer | added | Paolo Lipparini | timeline score: 2 | |
| Mar 27, 2016 at 0:09 | comment | added | Gro-Tsen | @MarkS. I grant you that defining games as graphs may have been more distracting than useful (I did that to make it completely clear what extensional equivalence means rather than take it as granted). However, using $=$ for Conway-equality when I'm trying to discuss a finer equivalence relation would probably have been a bad idea, since equality is always supposed to be "the finest equivalence relation that will ever need to be considered in any given domain". | |
| Mar 26, 2016 at 21:51 | comment | added | Mark S. | This is an interesting question, and I don't know if your proposal has been considered in any depth before. That said, I found the way you worded your question to be a bit of a hindrance, as you set things up in preparation for loopy games which it seems you are not interested in. It seems that in more conventional notation, you could simply say something like: "Note that $(1+1)\times *=*+*=0$, but $2\times *=\{1,0|\}\times*=*2\ne0$, where $\times$ is the Conway product. Has anyone examined the equivalence relation: $G \triangleq G'$ iff $G\times H=G'\times H$ for all $H$?" | |
| Mar 25, 2016 at 15:54 | history | edited | Gro-Tsen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
more slight clarifications
|
| Mar 25, 2016 at 15:25 | history | asked | Gro-Tsen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |