properties of Heyting algebras∗
CWoo†
2013-03-22 3:54:09
Proposition 1. Let H be a Brouwerian lattice. The following properties hold:
1. a → a = 1
2. a ∧ (a → b) = a ∧ b
3. b ∧ (a → b) = b
4. a → (b ∧ c) = (a → b) ∧ (a → c)
Proof. The first three equations are proved in this entry. We prove the last
equation here. For any x ∈ H, x ≤ a → (b ∧ c) iff x ∧ a ≤ b ∧ c iff x ∧ a ≤ b and
x ∧ a ≤ c iff x ≤ a → b and x ≤ a → c iff x ≤ (a → b) ∧ (a → c). Hence the
equation holds.
Proposition 2. Conversely, a lattice with a binary operation → satisfying the
four conditions above is a Brouwerian lattice.
Proof. Let H be a lattice with a binary operation → on it satisfying the identities
above. We want to show that x ≤ a → b iff x ∧ a ≤ b for any x ∈ H. First,
suppose x ≤ a → b. Then x ∧ a ≤ a ∧ (a → b) = a ∧ b ≤ b. Conversely, suppose
x ∧ a ≤ b. Then a → (x ∧ a) ≤ a → b by the property 6 in this entry. As a
result, x = x ∧ (a → x) ≤ (a → a) ∧ (a → x) = a → (a ∧ x) ≤ a → b.
Corollary 1. The class of Brouwerian lattices is equational. The class of Heyting algebras is equational.
Proof. The first fact is the result of the two propositions above. The second
comes from the fact that 0 is not used in the proofs of the propositions.
Proposition 3. Let H be a Heyting algebra. Then a ∨ a∗ = 1 iff a∗∗ = a for
all a ∈ H.
∗ hPropertiesOfHeytingAlgebrasi created: h2013-03-2i by: hCWooi version: h42506i
Privacy setting: h1i hDefinitioni h03G10i h06D20i
† This text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License 3.0.
You can reuse this document or portions thereof only if you do so under terms that are
compatible with the CC-BY-SA license.
1
Proof. Suppose a ∨ a∗ = 1. Since a ≤ a∗∗ in any Heyting algebra, we only need
to show that a∗∗ ≤ a. Since H is distributive, we have a∗∗ = a∗∗ ∧ (a ∨ a∗ ) =
(a∗∗ ∧ a) ∨ (a∗∗ ∧ a∗ ) = a∗∗ ∧ a. The last equation comes from the fact that
a∗∗ ∧ a∗ = 0. As a result, a∗∗ ≤ a. Conversely, suppose a∗∗ = a. Now,
(a ∨ a∗ )∗ ≤ a∗ ∧ a∗∗ = 0, and therefore a ∨ a∗ = (a ∨ a∗ )∗∗ = 0∗ = 1.
Note, the last inequality in the proof above comes from the inequality (a ∨
b)∗ ≤ a∗ ∧ b∗ , which is a direct consequence of the fact that pseudocomplementation is order-reversing: x ≤ y implies that y ∗ ≤ x∗ .
Corollary 2. A Heyting algebra where psuedocomplentation ∗ satisfies the equivalent conditions above is a Boolean algebra. Conversely, a Boolean algebra with
a → b := a∗ ∨ b is a Heyting algebra.
Proof. Since a ∧ a∗ = 0 and a ∨ a∗ = 1, the pseudocomplementation operation
∗ is the complementation operation. And because any Heyting algebra is distributive, it is Boolean as a result. Conversely, assume B is Boolean. Then
c ≤ a → b = a∗ ∨ b, so that c ∧ a ≤ a ∧ (a∗ ∨ b) = a ∧ b ≤ b. On the other hand,
if c ∧ a ≤ b, then c ≤ c ∨ a∗ = (c ∧ a) ∨ a∗ ≤ a∗ ∨ b = a → b.
Proposition 4. A subset F of a Heyting algebra H is an ultrafilter iff there is
a Heyting algebra homomorphism f : H → {0, 1} with F = f −1 (1).
Proof. First, assume f : H → {0, 1} is a Heyting algebra homomorphism, and
F = f −1 (1). Clearly, F is a filter. Suppose 0 6= a ∈
/ F , then f (a) = 0. Now,
f (a∗ ) = f (a)∗ = 0∗ = 1, so a∗ ∈ F . If F is not maximal, let G be a proper filter
containing F and a, then a∗ ∈ G, so that 0 ∈ a ∧ a∗ ∈ G, and hence G = H,
contradicting the fact that G is proper. So F is maximal.
Conversely, suppose F is an ultrafilter of H. Define f : H → {0, 1} by f (x) =
1 iff x ∈ F . Let a, b ∈ H. We first show that f is a lattice homomorphism:
• First, f (a ∧ b) = 1 iff a ∧ b ∈ F iff a, b ∈ F (since F is a filter) iff
f (a) = f (b) = 1. So f respects ∧.
• Next, if f (a ∨ b) = 0, then a ∨ b ∈
/ F , which means neither a nor b is in
F , or that f (a) = f (b) = 0. On the other hand, if f (a) = f (b) = 0, then
neither a nor b is in F , since F is an ultrafilter. As a result, neither is
a ∨ b ∈ F , which means f (a ∨ b) = 0. So f respects ∨.
So f is a lattice homomorphism. Next, we show that f is a Heyting algebra
homomorphism, which means showing that f respects →: f (a → b) = f (a) →
f (b). It suffices to show f (a → b) = 0 iff f (a) = 1 and f (b) = 0.
• First, if f (a) = 1 and f (b) = 0 then a ∈ F and b ∈
/ F . If a → b ∈ F ,
then (a → b) ∧ a ∈ F . Since (a → b) ∧ a ≤ b, b ∈ F , a contradiction. So
a→b∈
/ F.
• On the other hand, suppose f (a → b) = 0. So a → b ∈
/ F . Now, since
b ≤ a → b, b ∈
/ F , or f (b) = 0. If f (a) = 0, then a ∈
/ F , so there is some
c ∈ F with 0 = a ∧ c. But this means c ≤ a∗ , or a∗ ∈ F . Since a∗ ≤ a → b,
we would have a → b ∈ F , a contradiction. Hence f (a) = 1.
2
Therefore f is a Heyting algebra homomorphism.
In the proof above, we use the fact that, for any ultrafilter F in a bounded
lattice L, if x ∈
/ F , then there is y ∈ F such that 0 = x ∧ y (for otherwise,
the filter generated by x and F would be proper and properly contains F ,
contradicting the maximality of F ). If in addition L were distributive, then
a ∨ b ∈ F implies that either a ∈ F or b ∈ F . To see this, suppose a ∈
/ F . Then
there is c ∈ F such that 0 = a ∧ c. Similarly, if b ∈
/ F , there is d ∈ F such that
0 = b ∧ d. Let e = c ∧ d ∈ F . So e 6= 0, and a ∧ e = 0 = b ∧ e. Furthermore,
0 = (a ∧ e) ∨ (b ∧ e) = (a ∨ b) ∧ e. If a ∨ b ∈ F , so would 0 ∈ F , a contradiction.
Hence a ∨ b ∈
/ F.
3