Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T20:11:37.310Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Normal lattices

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 April 2009

William H. Cornish
William H. Cornish
Affiliation:
The Flinders University of South Australia, Bedford Park, South Australia 5042
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

If L is a distributive lattice with 0 then it is shown that each prime ideal contains a unique minimal prime ideal if and only if, for any x and y in L, x ∧ y = 0 implies (x]*) ∨ (y]* L). A distributive lattice with 0 is called normal if it satisfies the conditions of this result. This terminology is appropriate for the following reasons. Firstly the lattice of closed subsets of a T1-space is normal if and only if the space is normal. Secondly lattices satisfying the above annihilator condition are sometimes called normal by those mathematicians interested in (Wallman-) compactications, for example see [2].

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Australian Mathematical Society , Volume 14 , Issue 2 , September 1972 , pp. 200 - 215
Copyright
Copyright © Australian Mathematical Society 1972

References

[1]Banaschewski, B., ‘On Wallman's method of compactification’, Math. Nachr. 27 (1963), 105–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2]Biles, C. M., ‘Wallman-type compactification’, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 25 (1970), 363–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Gillman, L. and Jerison, M., Rings of continuous, functions, (Van Nostrand) (1960).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Grätzer, G. and Schmidt, E. T., ‘On a problem of M. H. Stone’, Acta Math. Acad. Sci. Hung. 8 (1957), 455–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5]Katriňák, T., ‘Remarks on Stone lattices, I’ (Russian) Math. —fyz. casopis 16 (1966), 128–142.Google Scholar
[6]Kist, J. E., ‘Minimal prime ideals in commutative semigroups’, Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 13 (1963), 31–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Lambek, J., Lectures on rings and modules, (Blaisdell, 1966)Google Scholar
[8]Mandelker, M., ‘Relative annihilators in lattices’, Duke Math. J. 40 (1970), 377–386.Google Scholar
[9]Oates, D. K., ‘Simple extreme points’ J. London Math. Soc. (2) 1 (1969), 135–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10]Speed, T. P., ‘Some remarks on a class of distributive lattices’, J. Austral. Math. Soc. 9 (1969), 289–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[11]Speed, T. P., ‘On Stone lattices’, J. Austral. Math. Soc. 9 (1969), 297–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12]Speed, T. P., ‘Two congruences on distributive lattices’, Bull. Soc. Roy. Sci. Liège 38 (1969), 86–95.Google Scholar
[13]Varlet, J., ‘On the characterization of Stone lattices’, Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged) 27 (1966), 81–84.Google Scholar
[14]Varlet, J., ‘A generalization of the notion of pseudo-complementedness’, Bull. Soc. Roy. Sci. Liège 37 (1968), 149–158.Google Scholar