Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Motivating question: What lies beyond the Sedenions?

I'm aware that one can construct a hierarchy of number systems via the Cayley-Dickson process:

$$\mathbb{R} \subset \mathbb{C} \subset \mathbb{H} \subset \mathbb{O} \subset \mathbb{S} \subset \ldots $$

"Reals" $\subset$ "Complex" $\subset$ "Quaternions" $\subset$ "Octonions" $\subset$ "Sedenions" $\subset$ $\ldots$

and that at each step you're given a multiplication table that tell how the elements interact. As you move up the ladder, certain "nice" properties are lost: ordering, commutativity, associativity, multiplicative normedness, etc... Given the multiplication table, you can show that these properties don't hold.

Eric Naslund noted that "the first 4 are very special as they are the unique 4 normed divison algebras over R", no surprise then that these $2^n$-ions have found quite a bit of use. I'm interested in the sequence itself however, irrespective of how useful a $2^{256}$-ion might be (ducenti-quinquaginta-sex-ion?).

I feel like something deeper is going on here though that I don't understand. Why are these particular properties lost at each step? Is it possible to quantify the process such that, at the $2^n$-ion you can say something about the symmetry of the multiplication table*?

* I'm making an ansatz that there is a connection between the symmetry of the multiplication table and these "nice" properties.

share|improve this question
Not directly an answer, but the paper math.usask.ca/~bremner/research/publications/BHiaocdp.pdf may be of interest. All the algebras constructed from the Cayley-Dickson process satisfy $(xy)x = x(yx)$ and $x^2 (yx) = (x^2 y)x$. In particular, they are power associative, i.e., (nonnegative integer) powers of elements are well-defined. –  Ted Feb 29 '12 at 17:12
See also what John Baez has to say: math.ucr.edu/home/baez/octonions/node5.html –  Yuval Filmus Jun 25 '12 at 3:48

1 Answer 1

up vote 6 down vote accepted

There are eight equivalent definitions of the Cayley-Dickson product of ordered pairs, but one that is commonly used is $(a,b)(c,d)=(ac-db^*,a^*d+cb)$ where the conjugate (for all eight variations) is defined as $(a,b)^*=(a^*,-b)$.

The unit basis vectors $e_0,e_1,e_2,\cdots$ for all finite dimensional Cayley-Dickson vectors may be defined in various ways, but to preserve the inherent symmetry of the multiplication table, the most natural way to define the sequence is $e_{2n}=(e_n,0)$ and $e_{2n+1}=(0,e_n)$ for $n\ge0$. Note that this produces a different numbering from the usual numbering of the Octonion basis vectors as used by Octonion specialists and, that as a result, their multiplication table does not reveal the inherent symmetry of the process.

In addition to revealing the symmetry of the Cayley-Dickson process, this numbering of the basis vectors has the added advantage that for all non-negative integers $i,j$ it is true that $e_ie_j=\pm e_k$ where $k$ is the bit-wise "exclusive or" of the binary representations of $i$ and $j$.

Using this numbering of the basis vectors, the multiplication table of any finite dimensional Cayley-Dickson space can be recovered from the following properties:

  1. $e_1e_{2n}=e_{2n+1}$ for all $n\ge0$.
  2. If $0\ne i\ne j\ne 0$ then $e_ie_j=e_k$ implies all the following:
    1. $i\ne k$
    2. $j\ne k$
    3. $k\ne 0$
    4. $e_je_i=-e_k$
    5. $e_je_k=e_i$ (these last two are the quaternion properties)
    6. $e_{2i}e_{2j}=e_{2k}$
    7. $e_{2i}e_{2j+1}=e_{2k+1}$
    8. $e_{2i+1}e_{2j}=e_{2k+1}$
    9. $e_{2j+1}e_{2i+1}=e_{2k}$ (note the reversal of $i$ and $j$)

For four of the other seven alternate ways to define the Cayley-Dickson product, property 1 differs, and for all seven, some of the rules 2.7, 2.8 and 2.9 differ.

Now whether the symmetry of the multiplication tables will explain the loss of properties, I do not know, but it might be an interesting subject for someone to investigate.

More information and links to my research can be found on my webpage at http://jwbales.us/

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.