5 Implications between selected laws
We collect here some notable implications between the the selected laws in Chapter 2. By Theorem 1.8, every implication can basically be established by a finite number of rewrites. In most cases, the sequence of rewrites is quite straightforward, and the implication is very easy, but we record some less obvious examples.
Definition 2.26 implies Definition 2.18.
Definition 2.12 is equivalent to Definition 2.9.
This result was posed as Problem A1 from Putnam 2001.
Definition 2.9 implies Definition 2.12.
This result was posed as Problem A1 from Putnam 2001.
The following result was Problem A4 on Putnam 1978.
Definition 2.43 implies Definition 2.42 and Definition 2.25.
Definition 2.37 is equivalent to Definition 2.2.
The following result was established in [ 11 ] .
Magmas obeying Definition 2.32 also obey Definition 2.39, Definition 2.15, Definition 2.11, Definition 2.8, Definition 2.10, Definition 2.9, Definition 2.18, and Definition 2.46, and are in fact abelian groups of exponent two. Conversely, all abelian groups of exponent two obey Definition 2.32.
Definition 2.29 is equivalent to Definition 2.2.
Definition Definition 2.55 axiomatizes the Sheffer stroke operation
A natural central groupoid is, up to isomorphism, a magma with carrier
These are examples of central groupoids (Definition 2.23).
Definition 2.53 characterizes natural central groupoids.