Timeline for Lawvere theory and presentations of groups
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 10 at 13:22 | comment | added | HJRW | The title asks about presentations of groups, but the question seems to be about presentations of the theory of groups. These are very different things -- perhaps the title should be altered to something less misleading? | |
| Nov 9 at 11:43 | comment | added | Zhen Lin | Yes: there is a canonical one, namely the one that has all the operations. | |
| Nov 9 at 9:47 | comment | added | Sylvain Cabanacq | @zhen-lin : it's well known that there are different axiomatic systems for groups or boolean algebras (cup, cap, minus ; cup, minus, zero ; etc). I wondered if Lawvere-theoretical machinery allows to define one of these lists of primitive operations as the right one, the good definition of boolean algebras. | |
| Nov 8 at 16:19 | comment | added | James E Hanson | How are you defining what it means for a presentation to be the 'right' one? | |
| Nov 8 at 15:31 | comment | added | Zhen Lin | Considering the concept that bears his name, you may be unsurprised to learn that the presentation so obtained is the Lawvere theory of the given category of algebras, which though completely canonical and natural, can hardly be said to be a presentation useful for calculations... | |
| Nov 8 at 15:27 | review | Close votes | |||
| Nov 23 at 3:06 | |||||
| S Nov 8 at 14:55 | review | First questions | |||
| Nov 8 at 15:09 | |||||
| S Nov 8 at 14:55 | history | asked | Sylvain Cabanacq | CC BY-SA 4.0 |