Equational Theories

4 General implications

We will be interested in seeing which laws imply which other laws, in the sense that magmas obeying the former law automatically obey the latter. We will also be interested in anti-implications showing that one law does not imply another, by producing examples of magmas that obey the former law but not the latter. Here is a formal definition.

Definition 4.1 Implication

A law E is said to imply another law E if {E}E, or equivalently:

GwwGww for all magmas G

Two laws are said to be equivalent if they imply each other.

Lemma 4.2 Pre-order

If we define EE if E implies E, then this is a pre-order on the set of laws, and equivalence is an equivalence relation.

Note that we view the stronger law as less than or equal to the weaker law. This is because the class of magmas that obey the stronger law is a subset of the class of magmas that obey the weaker law. It is also consistent with the conventions of Lean’s Mathlib.

Proof

Implications between the laws from Chapter 2 are depicted in Figure 4.1.

\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth ]{../../images/subgraph.png}
Figure 4.1 Implications between the above equations, displayed as a Hasse diagram.
Lemma 4.3 Maximal element
#

The law 00 is the maximal element in this pre-order.

Proof
Lemma 4.4 Minimal element
#

The law 01 is the minimal element in this pre-order.

Proof

Every magma G has a reversal Gop, formed by by replacing the magma operation with its opposite op:(x,y)yx. There is a natural isomorphism between these magmas, which induces an involution wwop on words wMX. Every law ww then has a dual wop(w)op.

For instance, the dual of the law 01=02 is 10=20, which after relabeling is 01=21. A list of equations and their duals can be found here. Of the 4694 equations under consideration, 84 are self-dual, leaving 2305 pairs of dual equations.

The pre-ordering on laws has a duality symmetry:

Lemma 4.5 Duality of laws
#

The law ww implies ww, if and only if wop(w)op implies wop(w)op.

Proof

Some equational laws can be “diagonalized”:

Theorem 4.6 Diagonalization

An equational law of the form

F(x1,,xn)=G(y1,,ym),
1

where x1,,xn and y1,,ym are distinct elements of the alphabet, implies the diagonalized law

F(x1,,xn)=F(x1,,xn).

where x1,,xn are distinct from x1,,xn In particular, if G(y1,,ym) can be viewed as a specialization of F(x1,,xn), then these two laws are equivalent.

Proof

Thus for instance, Definition 2.7 is equivalent to Definition 2.2.

Theorem 4.7 Laws implied by the constant law

If w,w each have order at least one, then the law ww is implied by the constant law (Definition 2.20). If exactly one of w,w has order zero, and the law ww is not implied by the constant law.

Proof
Theorem 4.8 Criterion for implication
#

If ww is such that every variable appears the same number of times in both w and w, and ww implies another law ww, then every variable appears the same number of times in both w and w.

Proof