1,335 reputation
315
bio website mathematics21.org
location
age
visits member for 3 years, 4 months
seen yesterday

An amateur general topology researcher.


Sep
7
asked Products/limits for non-small indexed families of morphisms?
Sep
6
comment About binary relations under certain conditions and their composition
I've found a more inspiring proof for this. It follows from the formula $\Sigma=( \pi_0^{- 1} \circ F_0 \circ \pi_0) \cap ( \pi_1^{- 1} \circ F_1 \circ \pi_1)$ (I'm too busy now to post a full proof).
Sep
6
accepted About binary relations under certain conditions and their composition
Sep
6
revised About binary relations under certain conditions and their composition
deleted 15 characters in body
Sep
6
comment About binary relations under certain conditions and their composition
To prove that $\pi_0\circ\Phi_B\circ\Phi_A\subseteq G_0\circ F_0\circ\pi_0$ and $\pi_1\circ\Phi_B\circ\Phi_A\subseteq G_1\circ F_1\circ\pi_1$ is trivial. The hard part is to prove maximality
Sep
6
comment About binary relations under certain conditions and their composition
By $\circ$ I mean relation-composition. I've edited the type of relations
Sep
6
revised About binary relations under certain conditions and their composition
added 57 characters in body
Sep
6
revised About binary relations under certain conditions and their composition
added 61 characters in body
Sep
6
asked About binary relations under certain conditions and their composition
Sep
1
accepted Some (in)equalities about binary relations
Sep
1
comment Some (in)equalities about binary relations
I wanted this to work for every possible $F_0$, $F_1$ (at least for finite sets where this toy problem coincides with a real research). If for some $F_0$, $F_1$ it does not work, the result is negative and there are no reason to continue this research
Sep
1
comment Some (in)equalities about binary relations
"I may later add some stuff regarding the uniqueness." If existence of $\Psi$ is not guaranteed then there is no reason to invest time in checking uniqueness
Sep
1
comment Some (in)equalities about binary relations
Please make your explanation more clear by adding parentheses: Whether $(1,0,1)$ is $((1,0),1)$ or $(1,(0,1))$? It's hard to understand without parentheses
Sep
1
revised Some (in)equalities about binary relations
added 63 characters in body
Aug
31
comment Some (in)equalities about binary relations
@BorisNovikov: I have edited the question to be explicit on which sets my binary relations are defined
Aug
31
revised Some (in)equalities about binary relations
added 73 characters in body
Aug
31
comment Some (in)equalities about binary relations
@BorisNovikov: You have confused me saying that $\Phi\subset A\times A$. We need to require $\Phi\subset (A\times A)\times(A\times A)$, if $\pi_0: A\times A\rightarrow A$. (Note you don't need to teach me basic set theory, I understand it well enough.)
Aug
31
comment Some (in)equalities about binary relations
@BorisNovikov: $\pi_0: A\times A\rightarrow A$.
Aug
31
comment Some (in)equalities about binary relations
@BorisNovikov: $\pi_0$ is a function. (In ZFC) every function is a binary relation (a function is defined as a monovalued binary relation)
Aug
31
comment Some (in)equalities about binary relations
@BorisNovikov: I've added the definition to my question