Embedding reloids into funcoids

I have codified my idea how to embed reloids into funcoids in this draft article. Next I am going to attempt to solve some of my conjectures using this embedding. I will announce in this blog how solving the open problems goes. For the moment, I have also noticed a new problem: Conjecture $latex \rho […]

Decomposition of composition and a partial proof of a conjecture

Composition of binary relations can be decomposed into two operations: $latex \otimes$ and $latex \mathrm{dom}$: $latex g \otimes f = \left\{ ( ( x ; z) ; y) \, | \, x f y \wedge y g z \right\}$. Composition of binary relations is decomposed as: $latex g \circ f = \mathrm{dom} (g\otimes f)$. I […]

A brilliant idea about funcoids and reloids

In my book I introduced concepts of funcoids and reloids. To every funcoid $latex f$ it corresponds a reloid $latex (\mathsf{RLD})_{\mathrm{in}}f$. This allows to represent a funcoid as a reloid. Today I had the thought that it would be good also to represent a reloid as a funcoid. After not so long thinking I realized: […]

Direct products in a category of funcoids

I’ve released a draft article about categorical products and coproducts of endo-funcoids, as well as products and coproducts of other kinds of endomorphisms. An open problem: Apply this to the theory of reloids. An other open problem: Whether the category described in the above mentioned article is cartesian closed.

New concept: metamonovalued morphisms

Let fix some dagger category every of Hom-sets of which is a complete lattice, and the dagger functor agrees with the lattice order. I define a morphism $latex f$ to be monovalued when $latex \circ f^{-1}\le \mathrm{id}_{\mathrm{Dst}\, f}$. I call a morphism $latex f$ metamonovalued when $latex (\bigwedge G) \circ f = \bigwedge_{g \in G} […]

Crucial error in my definition of product funcoids

I have noticed a crucial error in the article with my definition of product funcoids (I confused the direction of an implication). Thus it is yet not proved that my “product” is really a categorical product. The same applies to my definition of coproduct.

Compact funcoids – $100 for one who finds my error

I have put online a rough draft of an article about compact funcoids. In the draft article there is an error which I have trouble to find. I will pay $100 to the first person which finds my error (unless I find the error myself). See inside the article.

A section about relationships of different products in my book

I have added new section 16.13 “Relationships of cross-composition and subatomic products” with some important theorems (which I am going to use in the second volume of my book) to my preprint. I have also removed altogether the section “Displaced product” and the definition of displaced product, as it has turned out that displaced product […]