01/20/2023, 12:33 AM
I want to add that in most cases " the candidates " are multiplication tables where the base elements satisfy most of the time the equation :
a*(b*c) = (a*b)*(a*c) up to sign ( +1 or -1 factors )
so we kinda get latin squares with the property of " pseudo self-associative " or " pseudo self-distributive ".
So it is very much connected to virtualĀ knots and latin quandles.
notice how self-associative ( or self-distributive although the other term is more standard ) implies non-associative for a latin square !
The number of latin quandles of size n times n with respect to the factorization of n is therefore very interesting too.
(the factorization of n is like a subgroup/subalgebra thing therefore the research )
Although this clarifies alot , there remain many questions.
iterating self-associative operators also comes to mind, this is also a non common subject just like tetration.
This is post nr 1729 of tommy1729 , hurrah !!!
regards
tommy1729
Tom Marcel Raes
" truth is what does not go away when you stop believing in it. "
tommy1729
a*(b*c) = (a*b)*(a*c) up to sign ( +1 or -1 factors )
so we kinda get latin squares with the property of " pseudo self-associative " or " pseudo self-distributive ".
So it is very much connected to virtualĀ knots and latin quandles.
notice how self-associative ( or self-distributive although the other term is more standard ) implies non-associative for a latin square !
The number of latin quandles of size n times n with respect to the factorization of n is therefore very interesting too.
(the factorization of n is like a subgroup/subalgebra thing therefore the research )
Although this clarifies alot , there remain many questions.
iterating self-associative operators also comes to mind, this is also a non common subject just like tetration.
This is post nr 1729 of tommy1729 , hurrah !!!
regards
tommy1729
Tom Marcel Raes
" truth is what does not go away when you stop believing in it. "
tommy1729

