Talk:Complete lattice

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Mathematics (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject Mathematics
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
High Importance
 Field: Foundations, logic, and set theory

Why does Cardboard give this page, which appears to be called "Complete lattice"? 12:34, 28 July 2005 (UTC)


The "Representation" section claims that every complete lattice is isomorphic to a lattice of sets. M_3 and N_5 are examples of complete lattices that, being non-distributive, are not isomorphic to lattices of sets. Would someone in the know mind checking up on this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:19, 11 November 2010 (UTC)


Shouldn't this artice be in Category:Lattice theory? -- Tobias Bergemann 06:59, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Seems reasonable to me, so I've done just that. Paul August 15:54, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Complete sublattice[edit]

The article should include a definition of complete sublattice (please cite source). Although I'm fairly sure I know the definition, I can't find a source right now.--Malcohol 08:57, 5 July 2006 (UTC) Actually, I found one in that reference at the bottom of the page. I've added its definition. --Malcohol 09:39, 5 July 2006 (UTC)


Could somebody add some counterexamples please? Examples that suit the definition are not enough to understand a concept.. Thanks, Alex —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:59, 8 May 2011 (UTC)