Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur

MTH202A Set Theory and Discrete Mathematics

Author: Kanchan kumari sharma

Roll no.: 221326
Instructor: Amit Shekhar Kuber

Dimond Isomorphism Theorem for Moduler Lattices

1 Introduction
In this section we are going to state and prove the dimond isomorphism theorem for moduler lattices. In
last section we saw moduler lattices and their properties.Further we will see some examples of moduler
lattices which follow the dimond isomorphism theorem. The dimond isomorphism theorem is similar to
second isomorphism theorem in algebra and it is generalization of the lattice theorem.

2 Dimond isomorphism theorem

(Church, 1950, Theorem 6, p.73)
Statement : if L be a moduler lattice and a , b are any two elements of L then there exist an
isomorphism between these two intervals [a ∧ b, b] = L1 and [a, a ∨ b] = L2 via the maps :

f : L1 −→ L2
x 7−→ x ∨ a

and

g : L2 −→ L1
y 7−→ y ∧ b

where x∨a is least upper bound and y ∧b is the greatest lower bound of pairs (x, a) and (y, b) respectively.
Converse is also true.

Proof :
Let L be a moduler lattice and ∀a, b ∈ L, we defined functions f and g such that :

f : L1 −→ L2
x 7−→ x ∨ a

and

g : L2 −→ L1
y 7−→ y ∧ b

where L1 = [a ∧ b, b] and L2 = [a, a ∨ b].

now ; we have to cheak whether these function are well defined or not .

Well definedness :
for f ,

1
let x1 , x2 ∈ L1 such that x1 = x2 then by defination of greatest lower bound and lowest upper bound
clearly,
x1 ∨ a = x2 ∨ a ⇒ f (x1 ) = f (x2 ) , i.e f is well defined.

for g ,
let y1 , y2 ∈ L2 such that y1 = y2 then again by defination of greatest lower bound and lowest upper
bound we get that ,
y1 ∧ b = y2 ∧ b ⇒ g(y1 ) = g(y2 ) , i.e g is well defined.

Now we are going to show that f ◦ g(x) and g ◦ f (x) are nothing but identity function on L2 and
L1 respectively.

f and g are inverse of each others :

g ◦ f (x) : L1 −→ L1
x 7−→ (x ∨ a) ∧ b

and

f ◦ g(x) : L2 −→ L2
y 7−→ (y ∧ b) ∨ a

if we show that : (x ∨ a) ∧ b = x and (y ∧ b) ∨ a = y then we are done.

so now consider the interval [a ∧ b, b] and x ∈ [a ∧ b, b] then ;

(a ∧ b) ≤ x ≤ b

but we know the moduler equation by previous section ;

x ∨ (a ∧ b) = (x ∨ a) ∧ b

which reduces to ;
x = (x ∨ a) ∧ b . . . (1)

again consider the interval [a, a ∨ b] and let y ∈ [a, a ∨ b] ;

a≤y ≤a∨b
again by moduler equation ;
y ∧ (a ∨ b) = (y ∧ a) ∨ b
which is again reduces to ;
y = (y ∧ a) ∨ b . . . (2)

so from equation(1) and (2) we get ;

g ◦ f (x) : L1 −→ L1
x 7−→ x

and

f ◦ g(x) : L2 −→ L2
y 7−→ y

2
Clearly these two composition mapping are identity function which implies that f and g are inverse map-
ping of each others .

Order preserving :
For f ;
x1 ∈ L1 and x2 ∈ L1 such that x1 ≤ x2 ⇒

(x1 ∨ a) ≤ (x2 ∨ a)

⇒ f (x1 ) ≤ f (x2 )
⇒ f is order preserving.

Similarly for g ;
y1 ∈ L2 and y2 ∈ L2 such that y1 ≤ y2 ⇒

(y1 ∧ b) ≤ (y2 ∧ b)

⇒ g(y1 ) ≤ g(y2 )
⇒ g is order preserving.

Surjectivity :
f and g are inverse mapping of each others which implies the surjectivity of f and g.

Injectivity :
Injectivity is also can be seen by the inverse mappings.
Thus there exist an order preserving isomorphism between [a ∧ b, b] and [a, a ∨ b].

conversely ;
let L be a lattice and x, a, b ∈ L then there exist a isomorphism between these intervals [a ∧ b, a] and
[a, a ∨ b] . we proved above that :
x = (x ∨ a) ∧ b

Now without loss of generality let x ≤ b; and L is a lattice so ;

x ∨ (a ∧ b) ≤ (x ∨ a) ∧ b
⇒ x ∨ (a ∧ b) ≤ x

But we know that : x ≤ x ∨ (a ∧ b) by the defination of lowest upper bound , which implies that ;

x = x ∨ (a ∧ b)

⇒ x ∨ (a ∧ b) = (x ∨ a) ∧ b
⇒ L is a moduler lattice .
i.e any lattice L is moduler if and only if it follow the dimond ismorphism theorem .

Example 2.1. Consider the lattice.

c

a b

d
Here c = a ∨ b, d = a ∧ b
We can easily see that interval [a ∧ b, b] and [a, a ∨ b] is in bijection with each other so is moduler lattice.

3
Example 2.2. consider the lattice .

a f

c
Here d = x ∨ a, e = a ∨ b, f = (x ∨ a) ∧ b, c = a ∧ b
Because there is no elements in [a, a ∨ b which mapped into x . i.e
∄ any isomorphism between [a ∧ b, b] and [a, a ∨ b]
which implies that this is a non moduler lattice.

References
Alonzo Church. Birkhoff garrett. lattice theory. revised edition. american mathematical society collo-
quium publications, vol. 25. american mathematical society, new york 1948, xiii+ 283 pp. Journal of
Symbolic Logic, 15(1), 1950.

Jeremy L Martin. Lecture notes on algebraic combinatorics. 2010.