Talk:Interior algebra

Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Mathematics (Rated B-class, Low-priority)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Mathematics rating:
 B Class
 Low Priority
Field: Algebra
WikiProject Philosophy (Rated Start-class)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

new stuff moved to bottom

Older talk

Will add more stuff relating topomorphisms to continuous maps and homorphisms to open continuous maps, as well as a bit about category theoretic formalism for whats going on. In time will add history section. - 13 Oct 2004

Ok I removed the TeX because it was just too ugly, please don't bring it back. I've made all xs and ys italic. 28 Sep 2004

What do you guys think about the change to TeX? Personally I think it makes the page look ugly. Also why the use of the |-> its not the way one normally writes the signature of an algebra? 26 Sep 2004

Why did someone add the word "fake" to the end of the Heyting algebras section? Some gripe against intuitionistic logic???? 24 Sep 2004

The law of excluded middle is either true or false! 24.7.87.135 02:41, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Say something connecting this to closure operator? Charles Matthews 09:49, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Definition of Generalized Topology

The definition of generalized topological space states that T is closed under arbitrary joins. This seems to imply the fourth condition, that for every element b, the join exists of those elements in T that are covered by b -- by the second condition this join is simply an element of T. What am I missing? --Ott2 08:16, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi, you are missing the fact that "closed under arbitrary joins" does not mean that arbitrary joins always exist, it means that when they exist they will be in T, so some subsets of T may not have a join, the fourth condition says that the sets of elements of T below a single element of B will always have a join. I will clarify in the article. Kuratowski's Ghost 12:33, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Executive summary?

The article launches into a definition straight-off, while leaving the "good stuff" for much, much later in the article. Would appreciate having an introductory paragraph explaining in general terms, what this is good for, and the nature of the exciting theorems and isomorphisms that the algebra generates. linas 16:23, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Definition of directly indecomposable

Directly indecomposable was just redirected to direct product. The article currently states "X is connected if and only if A(X) is directly indecomposable." Please ensure that this usage is correct for this article, otherwise there may need to be a disambiguation page. ᛭ LokiClock (talk) 20:53, 13 September 2013 (UTC)