7
$\begingroup$

Hi all,

Suppose that $\mathcal{B}$ is a Boolean algebra. It there a way to extend $\mathcal{B}$ to a smallest Boolean algebra $\mathcal{B}'$ that contains an isomorphic copy of $\mathcal{B}$ and is countably complete, i.e. every countable subset of $\mathcal{B}'$ has a least upper bound in $\mathcal{B}'$? By "smallest" I mean that the inclusion $i: \mathcal{B} \hookrightarrow \mathcal{B}'$ has the obvious universal property, i.e. for every homomorphism $f$ from $\mathcal{B}$ to a countably complete Boolean algebra $\mathcal{C}$ there exists a unique homomorphism $g: \mathcal{B}' \to \mathcal{C}$ such that $g \circ i = f$ (it would be nice if $g$ turned out to commute with countable sups too). If no such $\mathcal{B}'$ exists, is there some other useful definition of "smallest" countably complete Boolean algebra containing $\mathcal{B}$?

If it makes any difference, I'm mostly interested in the special case where $\mathcal{B}$ is a direct limit of a sequence of finite Boolean algebras.

Edit: Thanks very much for the replies, it's a shame I can only mark one as the answer. It will take me a while to absorb the various references I've been given, so if I run into difficulty I'll bump the thread with an edit.

Edit 2: Bumping with followup question, please see my answer below.

$\endgroup$

6 Answers 6

17
$\begingroup$

The short answer is "yes", and it's a special case of a much, much more general theorem on relatively free algebraic constructions.

In other language, you are asking whether the underlying functor from countably complete Boolean algebras to Boolean algebras has a left adjoint. The more general question is whether, given a homomorphism $\phi: S \to T$ between two monads on $Set$, the evident underlying functor

$$Set^\phi: Set^T \to Set^S$$

from the category of $T$-algebras to the category of $S$-algebras has a left adjoint. For this I'll direct your attention to this nLab article.

Of course, we have to know that countably complete Boolean algebras can be described as algebras of a monad on $Set$, but this too follows from general theory. I'll refer you to another nLab article for this; the article is not complete but it should give the idea. The upshot is that for any algebraic theory with only a small set of operations of each arity, there is a corresponding monad on $Set$ whose algebras are the models of the theory. The general constructions go back to work in the sixties, due to Lawvere, Linton, and others.

Edit: I'll remark that had you said "complete" instead of "countably complete", then the answer would have been no. In fact, the underlying functor from complete Boolean algebras to sets has no left adjoint; this is mentioned for instance in Categories for the Working Mathematician. But in your case, the theory is generated by a set of operations and equations, and all is well.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ ... but the link I mention below gives a completion functor with a useful adjointness property, albeit not the most obvious one. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 24, 2010 at 23:31
  • $\begingroup$ Apropos of what, Neil? Are you referring to the corollary at the bottom of the page? It is not a morphism of complete Boolean algebras, although it is I reckon an answer to one of OP's questions (where the extension need not preserve countable joins). $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 24, 2010 at 23:51
  • $\begingroup$ @Todd: yes, I am referring to the Corollary at the bottom of Johnstone's page 108 and the associated remarks on page 109, which cover essentially the same ground as your discussion with Joel below. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 25, 2010 at 10:39
10
$\begingroup$

Every Boolean algebra $\mathbb{B}$ embeds densely in its completion as a Boolean algebra, which is a complete Boolean algebra (more than just countably complete). The completion $\bar{\mathbb{B}}$ can be constructed as the regular open algebra, the set of all regular open subsets of $\mathbb{B}-\{0\}$, where the topology is generated by the basic open sets consisting of lower cones. A set is regular open if it is the interior of its closure.

Indeed, the completion operation is extremely general, and is used pervasively in set theory in the context of the forcing technique. Every separative partial order $\mathbb{P}$, and this includes any Boolean algebra (minus $0$), embeds densely in its regular open algebra, and this is always a complete Boolean algebra. This fact is the main connection between the poset-based account of forcing and the Boolean-algebra based account of forcing.

The wikipedia link above lists several universal properties of this completion.

$\endgroup$
24
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ But this is not a free construction that the OP was asking about (see his universal property). There is a theorem due to Gaifman and Hales that free complete Boolean algebras do not exist. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 24, 2010 at 23:46
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ No! He said nothing about f preserving infinitary joins that exist in B. He said "homomorphism f from (the Boolean algebra) B to a countably complete Boolean algebra B". I interpreted "homomorphism" as Boolean algebra homomorphism, nothing more. If indeed OP intended that f also preserve all infinitary joins that exist in B, then he should have said so, and then we are in perfect agreement, but I see nothing in his words that warrants the meaning you are giving them. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 25, 2010 at 3:00
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Let me just add that his question (as I interpret it) is a perfectly natural one from a categorical perspective. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 25, 2010 at 3:02
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Well, I know that's what you meant, but this is not a context stated in the original question, so "desired for this context" made me wonder whose desire and whose context. I think we can probably agree that each of us has given a correct answer but to different questions. (I will however point out again that Phil's question explicitly concerned countable sups, not arbitrary ones.) $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 25, 2010 at 4:49
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ An example that may clarify this is the countable atomless Boolean algebra B (a.k.a. free on countably many generators). Its r.o. completion is the Cohen algebra C, but it also embeds naturally into the random algebra R (Borel sets in [0,1] mod measure 0 sets) and that embedding doesn't factor through C in a sup-preserving way. In fact, there are no complete homomorphisms from C to R (the random real model doesn't contain Cohen reals). A nice exercise is to see where the embedding of B in R fails to preserve sups. None of this contradicts what Joel and Todd said; I hope it concretizes it. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 25, 2010 at 15:49
8
$\begingroup$

In the course of a forthcoming research project with Asgar Jamneshan (in ergodic theory), we managed to discover a rather explicit answer to this question, which I am recording here if anyone is interested.

Let ${\mathcal B}$ be a Boolean algebra, let $\mathrm{Stone}({\mathcal B})$ be its Stone space (the space of Boolean homomorphisms $\alpha$ from ${\mathcal B}$ to $\{0,1\}$), let $\Sigma$ be the Baire $\sigma$-algebra of $\mathrm{Stone}({\mathcal B})$. Then there is a natural inclusion $\iota \colon {\mathcal B} \to \Sigma$ defined by sending each $E \in {\mathcal B}$ to the clopen set $\{ \alpha \in \mathrm{Stone}({\mathcal B}): \alpha(E) = 1 \}$. This is a Boolean homomorphism which is universal in the sense that for every Boolean homomorphism $f \colon {\mathcal B} \to {\mathcal X}$ into a $\sigma$-complete Boolean algebra ${\mathcal X}$ there is a unique lift $\tilde f: \Sigma \to {\mathcal X}$ such that $f = \tilde f \circ \iota$.

  • Proof of uniqueness: the clopen sets in the Stone space $\mathrm{Stone}({\mathcal B})$ separate points, hence by Stone-Weierstrass the Baire algebra is generated by the clopen sets, hence $\Sigma$ is generated by $\iota({\mathcal B})$, giving uniqueness.
  • Proof of existence: Stone duality gives a continuous map from $\mathrm{Stone}({\mathcal X})$ to $\mathrm{Stone}({\mathcal B})$, which pulls back Baire sets to Baire sets, thus maps $\Sigma$ to Baire sets in $\mathrm{Stone}({\mathcal X})$, each one of which can be associated to an element of ${\mathcal X}$ by the Loomis-Sikorski theorem (every Baire set in $\mathrm{Stone}({\mathcal X})$ is equivalent up to meager sets to a unique clopen set). One easily verifies that this gives a map $\tilde f: \Sigma \to {\mathcal X}$ with the required properties.

[EDIT: a previous version erronously assumed that the pullback of a meager set was meager, leading to an incorrect conclusion. Now corrected.]

$\endgroup$
3
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ See Corollary 3.1 of F. M. Yaqub's paper: projecteuclid.org/euclid.pjm/1103035763 (I also independently discovered this result in 2017, and then only found Yaqub's paper much later by accident). $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 9, 2020 at 18:49
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for this! In fact a discrepancy between that corollary and what was claimed here made me realise a subtle error in my argument, now fixed. $\endgroup$
    – Terry Tao
    Commented Jun 9, 2020 at 22:19
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This is also known from the C*-algebra perspective: see Proposition 1.1 of Wright's paper "Regular $\sigma$-completions of C*-algebras" (londmathsoc.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1112/jlms/…) and compare it with Remark 5.3.4.(iii) in Saito and Wright's book "Monotone complete C*-algebras and Generic Dynamics" (link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-1-4471-6775-4). $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 21 at 10:33
4
$\begingroup$

You can also look at III.3.11 in Johnstone's book on Stone Spaces:

http://books.google.com/books?id=CiWwoLNbpykC&lpg=PP1&dq=stone%20spaces&pg=PA108

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

This question was answered in topological terms by J. Vermeer in The smallest basically disconnected preimage of a space. Topology Appl. 17 (1984), no. 3, 217–232. See here for a review and here for the paper.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

Hi all,

I've just come up with something that's relevant to the question I asked here. I'm bumping the thread partly in case anyone else cares, and partly in case (as is more likely) I've made an error and someone can point it out. Anyway: I believe I can prove that the $\sigma$-algebra generated by a Boolean algebra $A$ (in the sense of Todd's answer, i.e. the image of a left adjoint to the forgetful functor from $\sigma$-algebras to Boolean algebras) has a rather natural representation, namely as the $\sigma$-field generated by the double dual of $A$, i.e. the smallest $\sigma$-field containing all the clopen subsets of the dual space of $A$. Here is the proof:

Let $A$ be a Boolean algebra, let $A^\star$ be its dual Boolean space and $A^{\star \star}$ the dual algebra of its dual space, i.e. the set of clopen subsets of $A^\star$. Let $\bar{A}$ be the $\sigma$-algebra of Baire sets in $A^\star$, i.e. the $\sigma$-field of subsets of $A^\star$ generated by $A^{\star \star}$. Let $\alpha: A \cong A^{\star \star}$ be the canonical isomorphism, and let $\eta: A \to \bar{A}$ be the composition of $\alpha$ with the inclusion.

Suppose given a $\sigma$-algebra $B$ and a homomorphism (of Boolean algebras) $h: A \to B$. Define $B^\star$, $B^{\star \star}$, $\bar{B}$ and $\beta: B \cong B^{\star \star}$ as before. By Theorem 41, p. 376 of [1], $B^\star$ is a $\sigma$-space, i.e. the closure of every open Baire set is open. By Theorem 42, p. 381, there is a $\sigma$-homomorphism $\phi: \bar{B} \to B^{\star \star}$ such that $\phi$ maps ever clopen set to itself.

$\beta h \alpha^{-1}$ is a homomorphism $A^{\star \star} \to B^{\star \star}$, so by duality there is a unique continuous function $f: B^\star \to A^\star$ such that $f^{-1} P = \beta h \alpha^{-1} (P)$ for every $P \in A^{\star \star}$. It is easy to see that $f^{-1} S$ is a Baire set whenever $S$ is, so define

$f^\star : \bar{A} \to \bar{B}$; $S \mapsto f^{-1} S$.

$f^\star$ is clearly a $\sigma$-homomorphism. Let

$\bar{h} \equiv \beta^{-1} \phi f^\star: \bar{A} \to B$.

Then one may check, using the defining property of $f$ and the fact that $\phi$ maps clopen sets to themselves, that $\bar{h} \eta = h$. The uniqueness of $\bar{h}$ with this property follows from the fact that the range of $\eta$ generates $\bar{A}$.

So there's the alleged proof; I can't see anything wrong with it but the result strikes me as being "too good to be true", and if it is true then I'm surprised I didn't see any reference to it online before I started this thread. So I'll be grateful if anyone can spot a mistake.

[1] Steven Givant and Paul Halmos, Introduction to Boolean Algebras, Springer 2009

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ The unit of the Stone adjunction $\beta$ is not in general $\sigma$-continuous, so why is the factorization $\overline{h}$ $\sigma$-continuous? $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 20, 2012 at 20:45

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .