Timeline for Partial word orders on groups
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
3 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 1, 2010 at 8:52 | comment | added | user6976 | In general, question 1 is formulated in such a way that a negative answer seems impossible. How do you prove that a canonical way does not exist? The problem is that "canonical" is not precisely defined. When you see it, you can say that it is, but proving that it does not exist is not possible. I have reformulated the question to make it more concrete. Still "no" is not possible, but there are more variations for "yes". | |
| Nov 1, 2010 at 8:20 | comment | added | user6976 | I did not say that the canonical construction should always be non-trivial. If the group is trivial, all orders on it are also trivial. But your remark does rule out lots of groups. | |
| Nov 1, 2010 at 7:47 | history | answered | grok | CC BY-SA 2.5 |