Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Let $P$ be a finite partially ordered set with elements $0$ and $1$ such that $0 \le x \le 1$ for any $x \in P$. Does it follow that $P$ is a lattice? If not, what is a counterexample?

I believe this is a counterexample, but I'm not entirely clear on the definition of a lattice, so I was hoping someone would confirm or deny:

 / \
a   b
|\ /|
| / |
|/ \|
c   d
 \ /

In this poset, $a$, $b$, and $1$ are upper bounds of the set $\{c,d\}$, but $a$ and $b$ are incomparable, so $\{c,d\}$ has no least upper bound.

share|cite|improve this question
Yes, this is a counterexample. – egreg Apr 6 '14 at 23:35
up vote 4 down vote accepted

A lattice is a poset $P$ in which $x\lor y$ and $x\land y$ exist for all $x,y\in P$.

Your example is indeed an example of a finite poset with top and bottom which isn't a lattice, for the reasons you stated.

share|cite|improve this answer

You can take the set of divisors of of a positive integer $n$ partially ordered by divisibility condition. Clearly $n$ and $1$ will be global maximum and minimum. Do this for some $n$ with at leat two prime divisors, say $n=24$. Draw the Hasse diagram of this poset and you can remove an element suitably to get more examples.

share|cite|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.