Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Topic: Filters for products
Replies: 18   Last Post: Oct 6, 2013 4:52 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
William Elliot

Posts: 1,668
Registered: 1/8/12
Filters for products
Posted: Sep 30, 2013 11:31 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

http://www.mathematics21.org/binaries/volume-1.pdf

Definition 7.1.
Why is the expression "reloid" used for (F,X,Y),
a filter F for XxY?

Definition 7.5. What's a principle reloids?
A reloid (F,X,Y) where F is a principle filter
F_AxB, generated by {AxB} for some A subset X, B subset Y.

F_AxB = up_P(XxY) {AxB}.

Theorem 7.13
There's a direct simple proof without using the equivalence relation.

Theorem 7.14

(F,X,X) o (F,X,X) = filter generated by { AoB | A,B on F }
F^-1 = { A^-1 | A in F }; (F,X,Y)^-1 = (F^-1,Y,X)

(F,X,Y) o (F^-1,Y,X) = filter generated by { AoB^-1 | A,B in F }

Theorem 7.15. The reversal of the order for filters is a nusiance,
requiring always to deside which is being used. Reloids, filters for
XxY, are ordered by reserse subset while, but relations R subset XxY
are ordered by subset? The heck with it, too tediously confusing.
Theorem ignored.

Conjecture 7.16. Expleain what an atom ofa reloid is.

Theorem 7.17. The confusing notation for meeting or not meeting, which every
it may be, is cause for skipping Theorem 7.17.



Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.