Talk:General Associativity Theorem

Isn't this technically limited to proving associativity for any countable number of operations? Of course, you probably will never have an uncountable number of associative operations, but we should still be clear. --Cynic (talk) 04:51, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Probably is, actually. It's a fine point with (it seems to me) limited relevance ... I need to tidy this page up some time, but it won't be immediate. --Matt Westwood 05:37, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Please review proof
There is a (the?) proof at http://groupprops.subwiki.org/wiki/Associative_implies_generalized_associative with ref. to Dummit/Foote. I would like to tersify it for ProofWiki to better get my head around it. --Ralf Stephan (talk) 07:49, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Ref. / orig. site

 * Is it good, that Dummit & Foote? It's not a work I've come across. --prime mover (talk) 18:39, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Apparently a widely used abstract algebra textbook, with PDF versions on the net. Seems thorough, with lots of examples and exercises. --Ralf Stephan (talk) 06:25, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I've taken a look at that "groupprops.subwiki" site and note that it's not open for editing. Understandably I expect they'd be particularly reluctant to allow us to access it, as we are highly disliked in the wiki community, but it might be interesting to see whether we can steal, I mean share, some ideas. --prime mover (talk) 18:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * We're not liked? By whom/why not? :( --GFauxPas (talk) 04:40, 2 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Show me a good review of . See, you can't. --prime mover (talk) 06:47, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Maybe it's the ads? Where is an official statement about them and what they pay? --Ralf Stephan (talk) 06:51, 2 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Don't knock the ads. You never know when you've going to need to use a Russian marriage-for-immigration service.


 * The ads were discussed somewhere back in the mists of time, when we decided we didn't want to shoulder the expense of hosting this site ourselves. Nobody wants to have to pay to do mathematics. --prime mover (talk) 07:02, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Then and now. I understand the then. Nowadays you get a wiki for free with any free project on github, and that's what I can come up with in 5 seconds, without any research. --Ralf Stephan (talk) 07:07, 2 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Worth suggesting. Might be an idea to raise it on the main discussion page. --prime mover (talk) 07:27, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

onlyinclude
Shouldn't Formulation 3 include the theorem text only? I thought the onlyinclude tag would take care of that? --Ralf Stephan (talk) 07:55, 3 October 2014 (UTC)


 * It does, doesn't it?
 * I believe there may be a (recently happened) MediaWiki bug where when you change an included page, you need to edit/save the parent page for it to pick up the child changes. --prime mover (talk) 12:14, 3 October 2014 (UTC)