Saturday, May 23, 2009
NOW WHAT IS ACTUALLY A SEMIGROUP?
As I read, a semigroup is nothing other than an associative groupoid. It is said that a semigroup does not have to have an identity. Now I am curious to know what is a groupoid and why there does not need to exist an identity element in a semigroup and what are they or how they look. As far as inverses is concern there need to be none. Thus the set of integers will not qualify here. for every element in the integers with the ecception of zero has an inverse and as we saw earlier, the set of the integers is a ring and futhermore an integral domain. So semigroups must be sets with no identity and no inverses. I am thinking of the set of natural numbers. Natural numbers have no inverses and we know that the associative propety will apply for addition. In the natural numbers there exist no identity for addition because the identity for addition is zero and zero only belongs to the whole nubmers, yet something else must a a semigroup with no inverses and no identity property. I will have to wait to see more on examples of semigroup to see their truly importance, but for now I am satisfy with how much I have undertood so far about groups, rings, semigroups, and on idempotents. My worry so far is knowing more about groups. As far as I can understand a semigroup with an identity is a groupoid, and the natural numbers under the operation of addition while it seems to be a semigroup is not a monoid.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
IN PHENOUMENA
ABOUT NOUMENA AND PHENOMENA. Welcome to my blog
NOUMENA : I define Noumena as all that can be perceived by the senses plus all that which cannot be perceived by the senses and define phenomena as all that which can be perceived by the senses. Therefore who can tell? This is all there is to it and that is that? In this sense I agree with Kant when in his Critic of Pure Reason states " How is all knowledge possible?" Be that knowledge apriori or aposteriori or both. All knowledge is possible only inasmuch as we are capable of perceiving it which can be perceived at all. However we would argue; our knowledge, is incomplete therefore void of complete reality. We only know (at most) about the world partially and not totally. Who so ever maintains he/she knows everything is only pretending to know that which she/he does not know. One must then agree with Plato that to know anything, one must see what is and what is not possible in the world.
Hamletois
RESEARCH
KANT
NOUMENA
HAMLETOIS
Hamletois
RESEARCH
KANT
NOUMENA
HAMLETOIS
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.