Algebraic Perspectives on Substructural Logics

Davide Fazio download

https://textbookfull.com/product/algebraic-perspectives-on-
substructural-logics-davide-fazio/

Download full version ebook from https://textbookfull.com

We believe these products will be a great fit for you. Click
the link to download now, or visit textbookfull.com
to discover even more!

A General Algebraic Semantics for Sentential Logics 2nd

Edition Josep Maria Font

https://textbookfull.com/product/a-general-algebraic-semantics-
for-sentential-logics-2nd-edition-josep-maria-font/

Lectures on Logarithmic Algebraic Geometry Arthur Ogus

https://textbookfull.com/product/lectures-on-logarithmic-
algebraic-geometry-arthur-ogus/

Buildings Across Time An Introduction to World

Architecture by Michael Fazio Marian Moffett Lawrence
Wodehouse Michael Fazio Marian Moffett Lawrence
Wodehouse
https://textbookfull.com/product/buildings-across-time-an-
introduction-to-world-architecture-by-michael-fazio-marian-
moffett-lawrence-wodehouse-michael-fazio-marian-moffett-lawrence-
wodehouse/

Algebraic Numbers and Algebraic Functions First Edition

Cohn

https://textbookfull.com/product/algebraic-numbers-and-algebraic-
functions-first-edition-cohn/
Planning for Ecosystem Services in Cities Davide
Geneletti

https://textbookfull.com/product/planning-for-ecosystem-services-
in-cities-davide-geneletti/

Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome 1st Edition Davide

Chiumello (Eds.)

https://textbookfull.com/product/acute-respiratory-distress-
syndrome-1st-edition-davide-chiumello-eds/

Dynamic Stability and Bifurcation in Nonconservative

Mechanics Davide Bigoni

https://textbookfull.com/product/dynamic-stability-and-
bifurcation-in-nonconservative-mechanics-davide-bigoni/

Reframing Institutional Logics Substance Practice and

History 1st Edition Alistair Mutch

https://textbookfull.com/product/reframing-institutional-logics-
substance-practice-and-history-1st-edition-alistair-mutch/

Contemporary Perspectives on Relational Wellness

Floriana Irtelli

https://textbookfull.com/product/contemporary-perspectives-on-
relational-wellness-floriana-irtelli/
Trends in Logic 55

Davide Fazio
Antonio Ledda
Francesco Paoli Editors

Algebraic
Perspectives
on Substructural
Logics
Trends in Logic

Volume 55
 TRENDS IN LOGIC
Studia Logica Library

VOLUME 55

Editor-in-Chief
Heinrich Wansing, Department of Philosophy, Ruhr University Bochum,
Bochum, Germany

Editorial Board
Arnon Avron, Department of Computer Science, University of Tel Aviv, Tel Aviv, Israel
Katalin Bimbó, Department of Philosophy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
Giovanna Corsi, Department of Philosophy, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
Janusz Czelakowski, Institute of Mathematics and Informatics, University of Opole,
Opole, Poland
Roberto Giuntini, Department of Philosophy, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
Rajeev Goré, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia
Andreas Herzig, IRIT, University of Toulouse, Toulouse, France
Wesley Holliday, UC Berkeley, Lafayette, CA, USA
Andrzej Indrzejczak, Department of Logic, University of Lódz, Lódz, Poland
Daniele Mundici, Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Florence, Firenze, Italy
Sergei Odintsov, Sobolev Institute of Mathematics, Novosibirsk, Russia
Ewa Orlowska, Institute of Telecommunications, Warsaw, Poland
Peter Schroeder-Heister, Wilhelm-Schickard-Institut, Universität Tübingen, Tübingen,
Baden-Württemberg, Germany
Yde Venema, ILLC, Universiteit van Amsterdam,
Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, The Netherlands
Andreas Weiermann, Vakgroep Zuivere Wiskunde en Computeralgebra, University of Ghent,
Ghent, Belgium
Frank Wolter, Department of Computing, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
Ming Xu, Department of Philosophy, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China
Jacek Malinowski, Institute of Philosophy and Sociology, Polish Academy of Sciences,
Warszawa, Poland

Assistant Editor
Daniel Skurt, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bochum, Germany

Founding Editor
Ryszard Wojcicki, Institute of Philosophy and Sociology, Polish Academy of Sciences,
Warsaw, Poland

The book series Trends in Logic covers essentially the same areas as the journal Studia Logica, that is,
contemporary formal logic and its applications and relations to other disciplines. The series aims at publishing
monographs and thematically coherent volumes dealing with important developments in logic and presenting
significant contributions to logical research.
Volumes of Trends in Logic may range from highly focused studies to presentations that make a subject
accessible to a broader scientific community or offer new perspectives for research. The series is open to
contributions devoted to topics ranging from algebraic logic, model theory, proof theory, philosophical logic,
non-classical logic, and logic in computer science to mathematical linguistics and formal epistemology. This
thematic spectrum is also reflected in the editorial board of Trends in Logic. Volumes may be devoted to
specific logical systems, particular methods and techniques, fundamental concepts, challenging open problems,
different approaches to logical consequence, combinations of logics, classes of algebras or other structures, or
interconnections between various logic-related domains. Authors interested in proposing a completed book or a
manuscript in progress or in conception can contact either [email protected] or one of the Editors of the
Series.

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/6645

Davide Fazio Antonio Ledda
• •

Francesco Paoli
Editors

Algebraic Perspectives
on Substructural Logics

123
Editors
Davide Fazio Antonio Ledda
Dipartimento di Pedagogia Dipartimento di Pedagogia
Psicologia, Filosofia Psicologia, Filosofia
Università di Cagliari Università di Cagliari
Via Is Mirrionis, Cagliari, Italy Via Is Mirrionis, Cagliari, Italy

Francesco Paoli
Dipartimento di Pedagogia
Psicologia, Filosofia
Università di Cagliari
Via Is Mirrionis, Cagliari, Italy

ISSN 1572-6126 ISSN 2212-7313 (electronic)

Trends in Logic
ISBN 978-3-030-52162-2 ISBN 978-3-030-52163-9 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52163-9
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part
of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission
or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar
methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from
the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the
authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained
herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard
to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Acknowledgements

The editors gratefully acknowledge the following funding sources: Project “Per un’
estensione semantica della Logica Computazionale Quantistica—Impatto teorico e
ricadute implementative”, Regione Autonoma della Sardegna, (RAS: RASSR40341),
L.R. 7/2017, annualità 2017—Fondo di Sviluppo e Coesione (FSC) 2014–2020;
MIUR, within the projects PRIN 2017: “Logic and cognition. Theory, experiments,
and applications”, CUP: 2013YP4N3, and PRIN 2017: “Theory and applications of
resource sensitive logics”, CUP: 20173WKCM5 and gratefully acknowledge the
support of the Horizon 2020 program of the European Commission: SYSMICS
project, number: 689176, MSCA-RISE-2015. Finally, we thank the community of
researchers in the area of substructural logics and residuated structures, in particular
Hiroakira Ono and Constantine Tsinakis who played a decisive role in creating it and
in fostering the mutual collaboration among its members.

v
Contents

Editorial Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Davide Fazio, Antonio Ledda, and Francesco Paoli
Distributivity and Varlet Distributivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Paolo Aglianò
On Distributive Join Semilattices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Rodolfo C. Ertola-Biraben, Francesc Esteva, and Lluís Godo
Implication in Weakly and Dually Weakly Orthomodular Lattices . . . . 41
Ivan Chajda and Helmut Länger
Residuated Operators and Dedekind–MacNeille Completion . . . . . . . . . 57
Ivan Chajda, Helmut Länger, and Jan Paseka
PBZ*–Lattices: Ordinal and Horizontal Sums . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
Roberto Giuntini, Claudia Mureşan, and Francesco Paoli
EMV-Algebras—Extended MV-Algebras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
Anatolij Dvurečenskij and Omid Zahiri
Quasi-Nelson; Or, Non-involutive Nelson Algebras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
Umberto Rivieccio and Matthew Spinks
Hyperdoctrines and the Ontology of Stratified Semantics . . . . . . . . . . . 169
Shay Allen Logan

vii
Contributors

Paolo Aglianò DIISM, University of Siena, Siena, Italy

Ivan Chajda Faculty of Science, Department of Algebra and Geometry, Palacký
University Olomouc, Olomouc, Czech Republic
Anatolij Dvurečenskij Mathematical Institute, Slovak Academy of Sciences,
Bratislava, Slovakia; Faculty of Sciences, Palacký University Olomouc, Olomouc,
Czech Republic
Rodolfo C. Ertola-Biraben CLE-UNICAMP, Campinas, SP, Brazil
Francesc Esteva IIIA-CSIC, Belaterra, Spain
Antonio Ledda Dipartimento di Pedagogia, Psicologia, Filosofia, Università di
Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
Francesco Paoli Dipartimento di Pedagogia, Psicologia, Filosofia, Università di
Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
Davide Fazio Dipartimento di Pedagogia, Psicologia, Filosofia, Università di
Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
Roberto Giuntini Dipartimento di Pedagogia, Psicologia, Filosofia, Università di
Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
Lluís Godo IIIA-CSIC, Belaterra, Spain
Helmut Länger Institute of Discrete Mathematics and Geometry TU Wien
Wiedner Hauptstraße 8-10 1040 Vienna Austria and Department of Algebra and
Geometry, Palacký University Olomouc 17., Olomouc, Czech Republic
Shay Allen Logan Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, USA
Claudia Mureşan Dipartimento di Pedagogia, Psicologia, Filosofia, Università di
Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy

ix
x Contributors

Jan Paseka Faculty of Science, Department of Mathematics and Statistics,

Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic
Umberto Rivieccio Departamento de Informática e Matemática Aplicada,
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, Brazil
Matthew Spinks Dipartimento di Pedagogia, Psicologia, Filosofia, Università di
Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
Omid Zahiri University of Applied Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran
Editorial Introduction

Davide Fazio, Antonio Ledda, and Francesco Paoli

Abstract After providing an overview of the algebraic investigations into substruc-

tural logics in a historical perspective, with a special focus on their relationships
with quantum logics, we summarise the contents of the subsequent chapters of this
volume.

1 Algebra, Residuation, and Logic

Although an elective bond with algebra had been a characteristic trait of mathe-
matical logic since its inception—think of Boole’s work, to name the most obvious
example—the XXth century and the first two decades of the XXIst century witnessed
an increasing and ever more fruitful interplay between these two disciplines. The
trailblazing enquiries by Tarski, Lindenbaum, McKinsey and other authors into the
algebraic semantics of classical, intuitionistic and modal logics established bridges
between these provinces of logic and well-trodden algebraic territory, such as the
theories of Boolean algebras, Heyting algebras, and interior algebras [38, 48]. Later,
the birth of Abstract Algebraic Logic as an autonomous field of research, originating
from the confluence of the Polish logicians’ investigations into the theories of logical
matrices and consequence operators and the study of algebraisable logics and their
generalisations [6, 15, 22, 53], was only possible thanks to an extensive recourse to

D. Fazio (B) · A. Ledda · F. Paoli

Dipartimento di Pedagogia, Psicologia, Filosofia, Università di Cagliari, Via Is Mirrionis, 1,
Cagliari, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]
A. Ledda
e-mail: [email protected]
F. Paoli
e-mail: [email protected]

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 1

D. Fazio et al. (eds.), Algebraic Perspectives on Substructural Logics,
Trends in Logic 55, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52163-9_1
2 D. Fazio et al.

universal algebra and lattice theory, as well as to the theories of the individual classes
of algebras acting as counterparts of the different logics under investigation.
Substructural logics [23, 39, 44, 46] are no exception to this trend. Here, too,
logic and algebra found fertile synergies after running on separate tracks for quite
some time. Substructural logics are usually defined via certain Gentzen-style sequent
calculi, or variants thereof, where the structural rules are suitably restricted or even
done away with—whence the “substructural” label. These logics did not emerge
together as a uniform corpus. Rather, this name started to enter common usage at
some point1 to refer to a largely heterogeneous family of pre-existing logics with
different origins and motivations:
• Lambek calculus was used since the late 1950s in mathematical linguistics and
especially in type-theoretic grammars [35];
• linear logic had been developed in the 1980s by J.Y. Girard in the context of
the proof theory for constructive logics, but presented interesting connections
with domain theory, the semantics of functional programming and other topics of
interest to computer scientists [26, 49];
• relevance logics had been introduced in the 1950s to solve paradoxes of material
implication and had obvious ramifications into the philosophy of logic and the
philosophy of language [1, 37];
• finally, fuzzy logics [5] had been intensively and fruitfully studied for some decades
before it was realised that they belonged to all intents and purposes to the sub-
structural family [9, 21, 41].
Observe that not all these logics were originally introduced by means of sequent
calculi: in some cases this kind of formulation was given only later, while in other
cases it is not even available now. Substructural logics are united by a series of “family
resemblances”, rather than by their falling under some common all-encompassing
definition. One such resemblance is the validity of some suitable generalisation of the
deduction-detachment equivalence in classical logic2 : ϕ · ψ entails χ iff ψ entails
ϕ\χ iff ϕ entails χ /ψ, for some (possibly non-idempotent and non-commutative)
conjunction · and some implications \, /. In any event, up until the 1990s substructural
logics were mainly investigated by syntactic methods, or by resorting to variants
of Kripke semantics [19, 43, 50]; with the exception of fuzzy logics, algebra was
occasionally employed but was far from being predominant.
Quite independently of these developments, in the 1930s, M. Ward and R.P. Dil-
worth [17, 51, 52] introduced residuated lattices as an abstraction from lattices of
ideals in rings. It is well-known that, given any ring with unit R and any two-sided
ideals I, J of R, upon defining

1 There is even something like an official birth date for the term “substructural logics”. This phrase
was coined by Kosta Došen on the occasion of the Tübingen conference on “Logics with restricted
structural rules” (7–8 October, 1990) co-organised with Peter Schroeder-Heister, which showcased
the Gotha of substructural research at the time.
2 In the commutative case the two implications always give a common result, denoted ϕ → ψ, and

the equivalence assumes the more familiar form: ϕ · ψ entails χ iff ϕ entails ψ → χ.
Editorial Introduction 3
 

n
I·J= ak bk : ak ∈ I, bk ∈ J, n  1 ;
k=1
I \J = {x ∈ R : I x ⊆ J } ;
J/I = {x ∈ R : x I ⊆ J } ,

such a product of ideals is a residuated operation with respect to set inclusion, with
the two divisions as residuals—namely, for any two-sided ideals I, J, K of R, we
have that:
I · J ⊆ K iff J ⊆ I \K iff I ⊆ K /J .

Abstracting away from this concrete example, a residuated lattice3 L is a lattice

endowed with a monoidal operation · that is residuated with respect to the order 
induced by the lattice reduct of L; to wit, if we denote by \, / the two residuals, we
have for any a, b, c ∈ L that

a · b  c iff b  a\c iff a  c/b.

It soon became apparent that this umbrella notion is extremely wide-ranging and
can be appropriately tweaked so as to subsume classes of algebras of prime impor-
tance in algebra and elsewhere4 : lattice-ordered groups; Heyting algebras, hence
Boolean algebras as a special case; Chang’s MV-algebras [14]—and by this list we
have barely started to scratch the surface. At the same time, the structure theory of
residuated lattices is surprisingly robust and elegant, revealing as it does subtle and
profound connections between the structure theories of individual classes of algebras
falling under the concept [7, 8, 23, 39].
Yet, there is another aspect that is even more noteworthy in the present context.
The algebraic residuation equivalence looks amazingly similar to the deduction-
detachment equivalence previously mentioned in connection with substructural log-
ics. This is no coincidence. The operations in residuated lattices, indeed, can be
used to provide an algebraic semantics for connectives in substructural logics, with
product interpreting conjunction and the divisions interpreting implications. More
precisely, all the principal substructural logics turn out to be algebraisable with qua-
sivarieties of (expansions of) residuated lattices as equivalent algebraic semantics.
Thanks to the groundbreaking work by Hiroakira Ono, Constantine Tsinakis and
many other researchers, from the late 1990s onwards there has been a major revolu-
tion in the methods and approaches employed to investigate substructural logics [7,
24, 33, 42]. Not only has the study of residuated lattices grown into a very sophis-
ticated and mathematically advanced theory, but algebraic methods have been put

3 This is not the original definition of a residuated lattice given by Ward and Dilworth, but (essentially)

the definition due to Jipsen and Tsinakis [33] that is nowadays in current use. Observe that other
different usages of the term can be frequently encountered in the literature: for a comparison, see
e.g. [39].
4 In particular, to achieve this goal it may be necessary to expand the signature by an extra constant

in addition to the unit of the monoidal operation.

 4 D. Fazio et al.

to good use with increasing frequency to solve open problems concerning substruc-
tural logics, including decidability, interpolation, and completeness. As a matter of
fact, the algebraisability relation has proved to be beneficial in both directions: many
interesting problems concerning classes of residuated lattices have been solved using
proof-theoretic methods, i.e. by working on the associated logics first, and then by
translating back the outputs into the algebraic framework thanks to the bridge granted
by algebraisability [23, 39].

2 Substructural Logics and Quantum Logics

As we have just seen, the assortment of nonclassical logics that can be encompassed
under the substructural heading is impressive: it nearly exhausts the range of the
available alternatives to classical logic (including, as a bonus, classical logic itself
as a limiting case). There is a remarkable outlier, though. However much we may be
willing to stretch the meaning of “substructural”, quantum logics [16, 34] can hardly
be counted in this category. Here’s the reason why: in mainstream quantum logics,
there are no connectives of conjunction and implication that are related by something
like the deduction-detachment (residuation) equivalence. Although many quantum
logics are algebraisable, their equivalent algebraic semantics fail to be quasivarieties
of residuated lattices. As a consequence, quantum logics and substructural logics have
by and large evolved quite separately. In itself, this circumstance is lamentable—the
more interplay you have between two neighbouring fields, the more likely it is that
methods and concepts from either area can be exported into the other, providing
fresh insights into its open problems and contributing to its overall development.
Occasionally, productive exchanges between these areas have emerged; yet, they
all have fallen short of generating a common systematic perspective. We cite a few
examples below.
1. Despite the recurrent slogan “Quantum logics have no implication”, there have been
important studies on implications in orthomodular logic, or in weaker quantum
logics, highlighting inferential patterns to be found also in substructural logics
[31, 32, 45].
2. All the main quantum logics are non-distributive. So are many substructural logics.
Thus, it is not too surprising that proof-theoretic and semantic methods that work
well in the former context can also be adapted to the latter, or vice versa. An example
is phase semantics for linear logic [26], which displays evident similarities with the
Kripke-style semantics for orthologic independently found by Dishkant, Goldblatt
and Dalla Chiara [16, 18, 30].
3. There have been some attempts to introduce common generalisations of quantum
logics and substructural logics. One such effort is Sambin’s basic logic [2], defined
via a sequent calculus that combines the restrictions on structural rules typical
of substructural calculi with the restrictions on contexts characterising Gentzen
 Editorial Introduction 5

systems for quantum logics [40, 47]. Basic logic is thus a common sublogic of
orthologic and of subexponential intuitionistic linear logic.
4. Fuzzy logics stand out among substructural logics because they can be given a
semantics in terms of residuated lattices over the [0, 1] real interval.5 In this respect,
they are close to the so-called unsharp quantum logics [16], which extend the
Birkhoff-von Neumann approach in so far as propositional formulas are assigned
meanings in more general structures than the lattices of closed subspaces of (equiv-
alently, of projection operators on) complex separable Hilbert spaces. The numer-
ous striking similarities between fuzzy logics and unsharp quantum logics have
been duly stressed in the literature [16, 20, 28, 36].
5. Finally, quantum structures have been used by Girard to interpret linear logical
proofs, obtaining a particular variant of denotational semantics for linear logic
[27].
Some recent results and approaches, however, hold promise to do better and to
provide a more comprehensive perspective that may be useful not only in establish-
ing a common framework subsuming both quantum and substructural logics, but
also in opening to researchers in either area the possibility of importing methods
and techniques “from across the street”. On the one hand, Chajda and Länger [10]
proved that the variety of orthomodular lattices is term-equivalent to a certain variety
of pointed left-residuated lattice-ordered groupoids. This suggests that the power-
ful techniques (e.g. nuclear retractions, quasi-completions) developed for residuated
lattice-ordered groupoids [13, 23, 25] can be generalised to the case where a single
residual is present. If so, it is not out of the question that there can be important
repercussions on the long-standing open problems as to whether orthomodular lat-
tices admit completions, or as to whether they have the finite model property.
Also, many quantum structures are not residuated, but they are operator residu-
ated, according to a concept developed in [11] and investigated in this volume in the
paper by Chajda and Paseka. This interesting generalisation of residuation has been
effectively employed with various uses, see e.g. [12].

3 The AsubL Conferences

The AsubL—Algebra and Substructural Logics conferences have been instrumental

in triggering the above-mentioned “algebraic turn” in substructural logics. These
meetings—a brainchild of Hiroakira Ono—have created an unprecedented opportu-
nity of collaboration between logicians working on substructural logics, but with a
primary interest in their algebraic semantics, and specialists of residuated structures
who are intrigued by the idea of finding for them a use over and above their purely
algebraic motivations.
The first installment of the conference, AsubL Take 1, organised by Hiroakira Ono
and Tomasz Kowalski, took place at the Japan Institute of Science and Technology

5 There is an ongoing discussion on the correct definition of a fuzzy logic: see [3, 4, 29].
 6 D. Fazio et al.

(JAIST) on 10–14 November 1999. Subsequent meetings were held at the JAIST
(2002), at the Jagiellonian University in Kraków (2006), at the JAIST again (2010)
and at the La Trobe University in Melbourne (2014).
AsubL Take 6 was hosted by the Department of Pedagogy, Psychology, Philosophy
of the University of Cagliari on June 11–13, 2018. Its programme included invited
talks by Hiroakira Ono, Constantine Tsinakis (cancelled), H.P. Sankappanavar, Ana-
tolij Dvurecenskij, Peter Schroeder-Heister and Tomasz Kowalski, as well as 36
contributed talks focussing on a wide range of different themes: residuated lattices
and their properties, individual classes of residuated lattices (including MV-algebras
and other classes of algebras of fuzzy logic), proof theory for substructural logics,
philosophical and game-theoretical interpretations of substructural logics, topics in
universal algebra and abstract algebraic logic with direct applications to substruc-
tural logics. Many talks were devoted to the connections between substructural and
quantum logics, or between residuated lattices and quantum structures, thus pro-
viding a stimulus for a greater interaction between the substructural and quantum
communities.
This volume includes some of the papers presented at the conference, representing
many of the topics discussed during the sessions.

4 Outline of the Volume

Four crucial threads in the current research into substructural logics and residuated
lattices lie at the centre of the papers that have been collected into the present book.
1. Reducts of residuated lattices. Residuated lattices are algebraic structures with a
very rich signature. Many of their properties, however, rather than depending on
the presence of all the operation symbols, are due to more fundamental features of
certain reducts of theirs. Although quite a lot is known about these aspects, at least
for some particular classes of residuated lattices, practitioners are at work to obtain
further insights. The paper by Paolo Aglianò, “Distributivity and Varlet distribu-
tivity”, explores the relationships between distributivity, Varlet distributivity and
divisibility in residuated semilattices, with applications to some well-known sub-
classes such as hoops. The paper by Rodolfo C. Ertola-Biraben, Francesc Esteva,
and Lluis Godo, “On distributive join-semilattices”, conceives a notion of distribu-
tivity for join semilattices that is motivated by Gentzen’s disjunction elimination
rule in natural deduction, and carefully compares it to many other notions present in
the literature. Moreover, the authors investigate this notion of distributivity in join
semilattices with arrow, the algebraic structures corresponding to the disjunction-
implication fragment of intuitionistic logic.
2. Relationships between substructural logics and quantum logics. Some articles
underscore the relationships between substructural and quantum logics, or between
residuated lattices and quantum structures, about which much was said above. In
“Implication in weakly and dually weakly orthomodular lattices”, Ivan Chajda
 Editorial Introduction 7

and Helmut Länger study the behaviour of some term-definable implications in

certain generalisations of orthomodular lattices, revealing the connection between
such structures and residuated structures. In “Residuated operators and Dedekind–
MacNeille completion”, Ivan Chajda, Helmut Länger and Jan Paseka take as a
starting point operator residuation (see above) in posets with unary operations,
studying the extent to which the multioperations M and R, which generalise prod-
uct and its left residual respectively, can be replaced by lattice terms in such a
way that the Dedekind–MacNeille completions of such posets become residuated
lattices with respect to these terms. The behaviour of these structures is investi-
gated in several special cases, including orthomodular lattices. In “PBZ—lattices:
Ordinal and horizontal sums”, Roberto Giuntini, Claudia Mureşan and Francesco
Paoli focus on two constructions—the ordinal sum construction and the horizontal
sum construction—that have been widely used in the investigation of both quan-
tum structures and residuated structures. These tools are applied to PBZ*–lattices,
common generalisations of orthomodular lattices and expanded Kleene algebras
that arise in the context of the unsharp approach to quantum logic.
3. Special classes of (pointed) residuated lattices. As recalled above, the study of
certain classes of residuated lattices predates the introduction of the general notion
itself, and proceeds unfettered to this day. Many researchers, moreover, are con-
stantly uncovering relationships between particular classes of residuated lattices
and other structures of interest to the algebraic and logical communities. In the
survey paper “EMV-algebras: Extended MV-algebras”, Anatolij Dvurečenskij and
Omid Zahiri devote their attention to EMV-algebras, a common abstraction of MV-
algebras and generalized Boolean algebras. It is shown that every EMV-algebra
with top element is term-equivalent to an MV-algebra, and that EMV-algebras
without a top element can be embedded into EMV-algebras with top element as
maximal ideals. Also, the category of EMV-algebras without top element is shown
to be equivalent to a special category of MV-algebras. In “Quasi-Nelson; or, non-
involutive Nelson algebras”, Umberto Rivieccio and Matthew Spinks introduce
quasi-Nelson algebras, a generalisation of Nelson algebras having a not necessar-
ily involutive negation. The term-equivalence result by Spinks and Veroff between
Nelson algebras and Nelson residuated lattices is generalised to a term-equivalence
between quasi-Nelson algebras and models of the Full Lambek calculus with
exchange and weakening, extended with the Nelson axiom. Three more equiv-
alent presentations of quasi-Nelson algebras are introduced; in one of them, the
celebrated Fidel–Vakarelov twist-structure construction is extended to the non-
involutive case.
4. Beyond algebraic semantics. We already recalled that the semantical investigation
of substructural logics is not exhausted by the use of algebraic methods: Kripke-
style semantics, topological semantics and more ad hoc methods—sometimes a
combination of all these—have been intensively employed. In “Hyperdoctrines and
the ontology of stratified semantics”, Shay Logan presents a version of Kit Fine’s
stratified semantics for the quantified relevant logic RWQ and defines a family
of structures called RW hyperdoctrines, showing a soundness and completeness
theorem.
8 D. Fazio et al.

References

1. A.R. Anderson, N.D. Belnap Jr., Entailment: The Logic of Relevance and Necessity (Princeton
University Press, Princeton, 1975)
2. G. Battilotti, G. Sambin, Basic logic and the cube of its extensions, in Logic and Foundations
of Mathematics, ed. by A. Cantini et al. (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1999), pp.
165–186
3. L. Bĕhounek, In which sense is fuzzy logic a logic for vagueness, in Logics for Reasoning
about Preferences, Uncertainty, and Vagueness, ed. by T. Lukasiewicz et al. (2014), pp. 26–38
4. L. Bĕhounek, P. Cintula, Fuzzy logic as the logic of chains. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 157, 604–610
(2006)
5. L. Bĕhounek, P. Cintula, P. Hàjek, Introduction to mathematical fuzzy logic, in Handbook of
Mathematical Fuzzy Logic, ed. by P. Cintula et al., vol. 1 (College Publication, London, 2011)
6. W.J. Blok, D. Pigozzi, Algebraizable Logics. Memoirs of the American Mathematical Society
(American Mathematical Society, Providence, 1989)
7. K. Blount, C. Tsinakis, The structure of residuated lattices. Int. J. Algebra Comput. 13(4),
437–461 (2003)
8. M. Botur, J. Kühr, L. Liu, C. Tsinakis, The Conrad program: from -groups to algebras of
logic. J. Algebra 450, 173–203 (2016)
9. E. Casari, Comparative logics and Abelian -groups, in Logic Colloquium’88, ed. by R. Ferro
et al. (North Holland, Amsterdam, 1989), pp. 161–190
10. I. Chajda, H. Länger, Orthomodular lattices can be converted into left-residuated  -groupoids.
Miskolc Math. Notes 18, 685–689 (2017)
11. I. Chajda, H. Länger, Residuated operators in complemented posets. Asian-Eur. J. Math. 11,
1850097 (2018)
12. I. Chajda, H. Länger, Residuation in modular lattices and posets. Asian-Eur. J. Math. 12(2),
1950092 (2019)
13. A. Ciabattoni, N. Galatos, K. Terui, Algebraic proof theory for substructural logics: cut-
elimination and completions. Ann. Pure Appl. Log. 163, 266–290 (2012)
14. R. Cignoli, I.M.L. D’Ottaviano, D. Mundici, Algebraic Foundations of Many-Valued Reason-
ing. Trends in Logic—Studia Logica Library (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1999)
15. J. Czelakowski, Protoalgebraic Logics. Trends in Logic–Studia Logica Library, vol. 10 (Kluwer
Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 2001)
16. M.L. Dalla Chiara, R. Giuntini, R. Greechie, Reasoning in Quantum Theory. Sharp and Unsharp
Quantum Logics. Trends in Logic—Studia Logica Library (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dor-
drecht, 2004)
17. R.P. Dilworth, Non-commutative residuated lattices. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 46, 426–444 (1939)
18. H. Dishkant, Semantics of the minimal logic of quantum mechanics. Stud. Log. 30, 17–29
(1972)
19. K. Dośen, Sequent systems and groupoid models, I. Stud. Log. 47, 353–385 (1988)
20. A. Dvurečenskij, S. Pulmannová, New Trends in Quantum Structures (Kluwer Academic Pub-
lishers/Ister Science, Dordrecht/Bratislava, 2000)
21. F. Esteva, L. Godo, A. García-Cerdaña, On the hierarchy of t-norm based residuated fuzzy
logics, in Beyond Two: Theory and Applications of Multiple-Valued Logic, ed. by M.C. Fitting,
E. Orlowska (Physica, Heidelberg, 2003), pp. 251–272
22. J.M. Font, Abstract Algebraic Logic: An Introductory Textbook (College Publications, London,
2016)
23. N. Galatos, P. Jipsen, T. Kowalski, H. Ono, Residuated Lattices: An Algebraic Glimpse at Sub-
structural Logics. Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics (Elsevier, Amsterdam,
2007)
24. N. Galatos, H. Ono, Algebraization, parametrized local deduction theorem and interpolation
for substructural logics over FL. Stud. Log. 83, 279–308 (2006)
25. J. Gil Férez, L. Spada, C. Tsinakis, H. Zhou, Join completions of partially ordered algebras.
Annals. Pure. Appl. Logic. 171(10), 102842 (2020)
Editorial Introduction 9

26. J.-Y. Girard, Linear logic. Theor. Comput. Sci. 50, 1–102 (1987)
27. J.-Y. Girard, Between logic and quantic: a tract, in Linear Logic in Computer Science, ed. by
P. Ruet et al. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2004), pp. 346–390
28. R. Giuntini, Quantum MV algebras. Stud. Log. 56, 393–417 (1996)
29. R. Giuntini, F. Paoli, H. Freytes, A. Ledda, G. Sergioli, What is fuzzy logic - and why it matters
to us, in On Fuzziness: A Homage to Lotfi A. Zadeh (Springer, Berlin, 2013), pp. 211–215
30. R. Goldblatt, Semantical analysis of orthologic. J. Philos. Log. 3, 19–35 (1974)
31. G.M. Hardegree, The conditional in quantum logic, in Logic and Probability in Quantum
Mechanics, ed. by P. Suppes (Reidel, Dordrecht, 1976), pp. 55–72
32. G.M. Hardegree, Quasi-implication algebras I. Algebra Univers. 12, 30–47 (1981)
33. P. Jipsen, C. Tsinakis, A survey of residuated lattices, in Ordered Algebraic Structures, ed. by
J. Martinez (Kluwer, Dordrecht, 2002), pp. 19–56
34. G. Kalmbach, Orthomodular Lattices (Academic, New York, 1983)
35. J. Lambek, The mathematics of sentence structure. Am. Math. Mon. 65, 154–170 (1958)
36. A. Ledda, M. Konig, F. Paoli, R. Giuntini, MV algebras and quantum computation. Stud. Log.
82(2), 245–270 (2006)
37. E. Mares, Relevant Logic (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2004)
38. J.C.C. McKinsey, A. Tarski, On closed elements in closure algebras. Ann. Math. 47(2), 122–162
(1946)
39. G. Metcalfe, F. Paoli, C. Tsinakis, Ordered algebras and logic, in Uncertainty and Rationality,
ed. by H. Hosni, F. Montagna. Publications of the Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa, vol. 10
(2010), pp. 1–85
40. H. Nishimura, Sequential method in quantum logic. J. Symb. Log. 45, 339–352 (1980)
41. H. Ono, Structural rules and a logical hierarchy, in Mathematical Logic, ed. by P.P. Petkov
(Plenum, New York, 1990), pp. 95–104
42. H. Ono, Substructural logics and residuated lattices: an introduction, in 50 Years of Studia
Logica, ed. by V.F. Hendricks, J. Malinowski. Trends in Logic—Studia Logica Library, vol.
20 (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 2003), pp. 177–212
43. H. Ono, Y. Komori, Logics without the contraction rule. J. Symb. Log. 50, 169–201 (1985)
44. F. Paoli, Substructural Logics: A Primer. Trends in Logic—Studia Logica Library, vol. 13
(Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 2002)
45. R. Piziak, Orthomodular lattices as implication algebras. J. Philos. Log. 3, 413–418 (1974)
46. G. Restall, An Introduction to Substructural Logics (Routledge, London, 2000)
47. J. Schülte Monting, Cut elimination and word problem for varieties of lattices. Algebra Univers.
12, 290–321 (1981)
48. A. Tarski, Foundations of the calculus of systems (Engl. transl.), in Logic, Semantics, Meta-
mathematics (Oxford University Press, New York, 1956), pp. 342–383
49. A.S. Troelstra, Lectures on Linear Logic. CSLI Lecture Notes, Stanford (1992)
50. H. Wansing, The Logic of Information Structures. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol.
681 (Springer, Berlin, 1993)
51. M. Ward, R.P. Dilworth, Residuated lattices. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 24, 162–164 (1938)
52. M. Ward, R.P. Dilworth, Residuated lattices. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 45, 335–354 (1939)
53. R. Wojcicki, Theory of Logical Calculi (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1988)
Distributivity and Varlet Distributivity

Paolo Aglianò

Abstract In this note we study the relationships between three properties of resid-
uated (meet) semilattices, i.e.: (1) being divisible, (2) being distributive (3) being
v-distributive.

1 Preliminaries

In this note we study the relationships between three properties of residuated (meet)
semilattices (whose definition is found below), i.e.: (1) being divisible, (2) being
distributive, (3) being v-distributive. While the connection between the first two
properties has been already explored in [1], the third deals with a different aspect
worth investigating.
A semilattice ordered residuated monoid (shortly a residuated semilattice) is
an algebra A = A, ∧, ·, /, \, 1 where
1. A, ∧ is a semilattice;
2. A, ·, 1 is a monoid;
3. / and \ are the left and right residuation w.r.t. ·.
In other words, for a, b, c ∈ A

ab ≤ c iff b ≤ a\c iff a ≤ c/b.

This implies at once that a ≤ b if and only if a\b ≥ 1, if and only if b/a ≥ 1.
Residuated semilattices are clearly related to residuated lattices introduced in [5] and
investigated at length in many other papers (see [11] and the bibliography therein);
residuated lattices have a very rich structure that is largely inherited by residuated
semilattices. Residuated semilattices form a variety, whose axiomatization can be
easily derived from the existing ones for residuated lattices (see again [5] or [13]).

P. Aglianò (B)
DIISM, University of Siena, Siena, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 11

D. Fazio et al. (eds.), Algebraic Perspectives on Substructural Logics,
Trends in Logic 55, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52163-9_2
12 P. Aglianò

Here we will simply state all the equations we need and that can be easily proved
using the above definition.
To save space it is convenient to define the truncated residuations

x/1 y = x/y ∧ 1 x 1\y = x\y ∧ 1.

The operations / and /1 are monotonic in the first argument and antimonotonic in the
second argument; the operations \ and 1\ are monotonic in the second argument and
antimonotonic in the first argument. Moreover:

Lemma 1 In any residuated semilattice A the following equations hold:

x\x ≥ 1, x/x ≥ 1 (1)

1\x ≈ x/1 ≈ x (2)
x\(y/z) ≈ (x\y)/z (3)
(x y)\z ≈ y\(x\z), z/(x y) ≈ (z/y)/x (4)
x(x\y) ≤ y, (y/x)x ≤ y (5)
x\y ≤ (x\z)/(y\z), y/z ≤ (z/y)\(z/x) (6)
x ≤ y/(x\y), x ≤ (y/x)\y (7)
x ≤ y/(x 1\y), x ≤ (y/1 x)\y (8)

(x\y) ∧ (x\z) ≈ x\(y ∧ z), (y/x) ∧ (z/x) ≈ (y ∧ z)/x (9)

y\((y/x)\x)) ≈ y/x, (y/(x\y))\y ≈ x\y. (10)

Proof Almost all the equations are straightforward consequences of the definition;
however the derivation of (10) is less direct, so we will prove one half of it, just to
illustrate the technique. Let a, b ∈ A; if in (7) we set x = a\b, y = b then

a\b ≤ (b/(a\b))\b.

On the other hand since a ≤ b/(a\b) by antimonotonicity of \ in the first coordinate

we get
(b/(a\b))\b ≤ a\b.

Hence equality holds and so does one half of (10).

A residuated semilattice A is integral if 1 is the largest element and commutative

if the monoid operation is commutative; A is divisible if the ordering is the inverse
divisibility ordering i.e. for all a, b ∈ A

a≤b if and only if ∃c, d with a = cb = bd.

Distributivity and Varlet Distributivity 13

The following lemma can be easily deduced from the results in [11]; we include a
proof for reader’s convenience.
Lemma 2 For a residuated semilattice A the following are equivalent:
1. A is divisible;
2. if a, b ∈ A and a ≤ b, then (a/b)b = a = b(b\a);
3. if a, b ∈ A, then (a/1 b)b = a ∧ b = b(b 1\a).
Proof Assume (1) and let a ≤ b; then there is a c with a = cb which implies c ≤ a/b.
Thus a = cb ≤ (a/b)b; but the converse is always true so equality holds. A similar
argument shows that b(b\a) = a and (2) holds.
Assume (2) and note that for any u ≥ 1 we have (1/u)u = 1; if also u 2 = u then

u = 1 · u = (1/u)u 2 = (1/u)u = 1.

Since for any a ∈ A a/a is idempotent and greater than 1, it follows that a/a = 1.
Now since a ∧ b ≤ b, from (2) follows that

a ∧ b = ((a ∧ b)/b)b = ((a/b) ∧ (b/b))b

= ((a/b) ∧ 1)b = (a/1 b)b,

and the other equality follows by using the corresponding properties of \ and 1\.
Finally that (3) implies (4) is obvious.
While the concept of being distributive is mainly used for lattices, it is possible
to define an analogous concept for semilattices: a semilattice L is distributive if,
for all a, b, c ∈ L, if a ≥ b ∧ c, then there exist b , c ∈ L with b ≤ b , c ≤ c and
b ∧ c = a. This is a real generalization: if a lattice is distributive as a semilattice, then
it is a distributive lattice since it must omit the two five-element lattices M3 and N5
(see [12] for an extended discussion). Distributivity is not inherited by subalgebras
or homomorphic images; it is however inherited by retracts [12] and that can be
used to show that the direct product of distributive residuated semilattices is again
distributive.
Theorem 1 ([1]) Any integral and divisible residuated semilattice is distributive.
In a very old paper [14] J. Varlet considered a different kind of distributivity.
He stated the property for residuated partially ordered groupoids (pogroupoids). A
residuated pogroupoid A = A, ·, /, \, ≤ is v-distributive (short for Varlet distribu-
tive) if for any a, b, c ∈ A if bc ≤ a then there are b ≥ b and c ≥ c with b c = a;
a v-distributive residuated semilattice is just one in which its residuated pogroupoid
reduct is v-distributive. We note in passing that this property (and related ones)
has been considered for quantum structures under the name of Riesz decomposition
property, see [8]. J. Varlet [14] characterized v-distributive pogroupoids by means
of equations; therefore is no surprise that v-distributive residuated semilattices form
a variety.
14 P. Aglianò

Theorem 2 The class of v-distributive residuated semilattices is a variety. More

precisely the following are equivalent:
1. A is v-distributive;
2. A  (y/(x\y))(x\y) ≈ y;
3. A  (y/x)((y/x)\y) ≈ y.

Proof It is very easy to show the 2. and 3. are equivalent, just using the elementary
properties of residuation; so we will show that 1. and 2. are equivalent. Suppose that
2. holds and let a, b, c ∈ A with ab ≤ c; then b ≤ a\c and from Lemma 1(7) we get

a ≤ c/(a\c).

By 2.
(c/(a\c))(a\c) = c

so A is v-distributive.
Conversely suppose that A is v-distributive; if a, b, c ∈ A we observe that

(c/(a\c))(a\c) ≤ c

always, again by the properties of residuations. Hence there are u, v ∈ A, with

u ≥ c/(a\c) and v ≥ a\c with uv = c. It follows that u(a/c) ≤ uv = c and so
u ≤ c/(a\c), hence u = c/(a\c). Therefore

c = uv = (c/(a\c))v

and by residuation v ≤ (c/(a\c))\c = a\c by Lemma 1(10). Hence v = a\c and (2)
holds.

2 The Relationships

If in a residuated semilattice, the meet coincides with the multiplication (sometimes

these structures are called implicative semilattices) then v-distributive is equivalent
to distributive in the usual sense for semilattices. Implicative semilattice are clearly
integral and divisible so the fact that they are v-distributive is a consequence of
Theorem 1.
There are however nonintegral and divisible residuated semilattices that are v-
distributive. If A is a residuated semilattice, we say that an element a ∈ A is invertible
if there is an a ∈ A with aa = a a = 1; an element a ∈ A is integral if 1/a = 1.
If A is also divisible then it is not hard (but see [9]) to check that for all a ∈ A
• 1/a = a\1;
• a is invertible if and only if a(1/a) = 1 = (a\1)a;
Distributivity and Varlet Distributivity 15

• if a ≥ 1, then a is invertible.
Let G(A) the set of invertible elements of A and I(A) the set of integral elements
of A. Observe that G(A) ∩ I(A) = {1}, since if a ∈ G(A), then a(1/a) = 1 and if
a ∈ I(A), then 1/a = 1. Moreover I(A) is an integral subalgebra of A, while G(A) is
closed under {/, \, ·} but not in general under meets. If G(A) = A, then it is obvious
that A is an -group where a/b = ab−1 and a\b = a −1 b, i.e. a divisible residuated
lattice that in general is not integral. However, any divisible residuated lattice is a
distributive lattice [9] so it is distributive as a semilattice. Moreover for any a, b ∈ A

(b/(a\b))(a\b) = (b/(a −1 b)a −1 b

= b(a −1 b)−1 a −1 b
= bb−1 aa −1 b = b

so any -group is v-distributive by Theorem 2.

Next a residuated semilattice is representable if it is a subdirect product of totally
ordered residuated semilattices; since in a totally ordered semilattice the term

[y/(x 1\y)] ∧ [x/(y 1\x)]

is a join (see [1]) any representable residuated semilattice is a representable residuated

lattice and the characterization in [11] applies.
We do not know if every divisible residuated semilattice is v-distributive; however
Theorem 3 suggests that if an example of the contrary exists, then it must be very
complex.

Theorem 3 Let A be a divisible residuated semilattice. Then any of the following

conditions implies that A is v-distributive:
1. A is integral;
2. A has a top or a bottom element;
3. A is finite;
4. for all a, b ∈ A the least upper bound of a and b exists;
5. A is representable.

Proof If A is integral and a, b ∈ A and ab ≤ b; so b ≤ a\b; by Lemma 2(2)

(b/(a\b))(a\b) = b

and A is v-distributive.
If A has a bottom ⊥ then ⊥/⊥ is clearly a top element. If A has a top element
, then 1 ≤ implies ≤ and so equality holds; however from (the proof of)
Lemma 2 a divisible residuated semilattice cannot have idempotent elements larger
than 1 except for 1 itself. So if such a semilattice has a top, then it must be 1, i.e.
the semilattice must be integral so 1. applies. If A is finite then it has a top (and a
bottom) so the previous case applies.
16 P. Aglianò

To prove 4. we observe that if the least upper bound of any two elements exists in A,
then A is the reduct of a residuated lattice. This is not entirely obvious, in that we have
to prove that the join behaves correctly w.r.t. the residuals, but it is true nevertheless
(see for instance [5]). So let A the divisible residuated lattice of which A is a reduct;
then G(A) = G(A ) and I (A) = I (A ); however, since A is a divisible residuated
lattice, G(A ) is an -group and A ∼ = G(A ) × I (A ) ([9], Theorem 5.2). So A is
a direct product of two v-distributive residuated lattices and hence is v-distributive.
Since v-distributivity is characterized by an equation involving only operations in
the type of A, the latter is v-distributive as well. Finally if A is representable, then
by the above observation is (term equivalent to) a residuated lattice; since it is also
divisible the previous argument applies.

In absence of divisibility distributivity and v-distributivity are totally unrelated

even in the integral case. As a matter of fact all our examples will be integral and
commutative; in this case the two residuals are equal and are usually denoted by the
symbol →.
Consider the following construction: let A be any integral commutative residuated
lattice and define A∗ in the following way. The universe is {0, 1} × A, the ordering
is ⎧
⎨ i = j = 1 and u ≤ v or
i, u ≤  j, v iff i = 0 and j = 1 or
⎩
i = j = 0 and v ≤ u.

and the operations are

⎧
⎪
⎪ (1, uv), i = j = 1;
⎨
(0, 1), i = j = 0;
i, u j, v =
⎪
⎪ (0, u → v), i = 1, j = 0
⎩
(0, v → u), i = 0, j = 1.
⎧
⎪
⎪ (1, u → v), i = j = 1;
⎨
(1, v → u), i = j = 0;
i, u →  j, v =
⎪
⎪ (0, uv), i = 1, j = 0;
⎩
(1, 1), i = 0, j = 1.

Since the ordering on A is a lattice ordering, then the ordering on A∗ is a lattice

ordering as well; in particular 0, a ∧ 0, b = 0, a ∨ b. It is clear also that A∗ is an
integral and commutative and also residuated; A it is usually called the disconnected
rotation of A [7, 10]. Note that in principle the construction can be performed also in
case A is neither commutative nor integral, but we do not need that much generality.
There are many properties of A that are inherited by its disconnected rotation; for
instance if A is representable, then so is A∗ and the argument is the following. It is
well-known [11] that prelinear residuated commutative and integral lattices form a
variety axiomatized by the single equation

(x → y) ∨ (y → x) ≈ 1.
Distributivity and Varlet Distributivity 17

So we have only to check that if A satisfies that equation, then so does A∗ , but the
verification is straightforward. Moreover:

Lemma 3 If the underlying lattice of A is distributive, then so is the underlying

lattice of A∗ .

Proof Let A∗0 , A∗1 be the subsets of A∗ whose first coordinate is 0 or 1, respectively.
Then A∗0 ∪ A∗1 = A and for all x ∈ A∗0 , y ∈ A∗1 is x ≤ y. Let then x, y, z ∈ A∗ with
y ∧ z ≤ x; if x, y, z ∈ A∗1 then there is nothing to prove. The same if x, y, z ∈ A∗0
since the ordering there is the dual of the ordering in A and the dual of a distributive
lattice is still distributive.
Suppose then that x ∈ A∗1 and z ∈ A∗0 ; then for all y ∈ A∗ , y ∧ z ≤ x. However
x ∨ y ≥ y, x ≥ z and (x ∨ y) ∧ x = x, so distributivity holds. There are no other
distinct possibilities, hence the proof is complete.

One property that in general is not preserved by disconnected rotations is divisi-

bility; integral, commutative and divisible residuated semilattices are usually called
hoops [4]. A hoop is cancellative if the underlying monoid is cancellative. Note that
a hoop is not necessarily a residuated lattice but representable hoops (usually called
basic hoops [2]) are lattices and we can apply the disconnected rotation to them. A
hoop is a Wajsberg hoop if it satisfies

(x → y) → y ≈ (y → x) → x;

Wajsberg hoops are basic [2] and in them x ∨ y = (x → y) → y. Moreover every

cancellative hoop is a Wajsberg hoop [2] but the converse does not hold. We have:

Lemma 4 ([3]) Let A be a basic hoop; then A∗ is a basic hoop if and only if A is
cancellative.

It follows that we can obtain a non divisible residuated lattice by rotating any non
cancellative basic hoop, but:

Lemma 5 Let A be a Wajsberg hoop; then A∗ is v-distributive.

Proof By Theorem 2 we need only show that A∗  ((x → y) → y)(x → y) ≈ y.

Since Wajsberg hoops are representable it is enough to prove the statement in case A
(and hence A∗ ) is totally ordered. As a final reduction we observe that the equation
is always satisfied if x ≤ y, so only we have to check two cases. First case: x =
1, a, y = 0, b. Then
18 P. Aglianò

((1, a → 0, b) → 0, b) → ((1, a → 0, b) = (0, ab → 0, b) → 0, ab
= 1, b → ab0, ab
= 0, (b → ab) → ab
= 0, b ∨ ab = 0, b,

where we used that A∗ is a Wajsberg hoop in the second coordinate. The other case
is x = 0, u, y = 0, v with u < v; then

((0, u → 0, v) → 0, v) → (0, u → 0, v) = (1, v → u → 0, v) → 1, v → u
= 0, (v → u)v1, v → u
= 0, (v → u) → (v → u)v
= 0, (v → u) → u = 0, v

where again we have used that A∗ is Wajsberg in the second coordinate.

So disconnected rotation of a non cancellative Wajsberg hoop is an example of a v-

distributive residuated semilattice that is not divisible. If we look closely at the proof
of Lemma 5 we observe that if A∗ is v-distributive, then necessarily for all a, b ∈ A
(a → ba) → ba ≈ a, otherwise we could always find a failure of the equation in
Theorem 2. This suggests us the following example; consider the real interval [0, 1]
with the ordinary product and let

1, if x ≤ y;
x→y=
y/x, otherwise.

Then it is easily checked that [0, 1] becomes a totally ordered hoop, called a product
hoop; if we rotate it, then for any x ∈ [0, 1)

(x → 0x) → 0x = (x → 0) → 0 = 0 → 0 = 1 = x

so its disconnected rotation cannot be v-distributive. The reader can check that to
obtain a non representable example we can apply the same procedure to any gener-
alized Skolem lattice as described in [6].
Our last example will be a non distributive but v-distributive residuated semilattice.
Such a semilattice cannot be a divisible lattice o a divisible and integral semilattice (by
[1]) or representable (since the underlying semilattice structure is a subdirect product
of chains, hence distributive). However it can be in principle integral and commutative
and our example is exactly of this kind. The universe of A is {0, a, b, c, d, 1} and the
operation tables are:
Distributivity and Varlet Distributivity 19

Fig. 1 The order structure

of A 1

c
a
b

· 0abcd 1 → 0ab cd 1
0 00000 1 0 111 11 1
a 0a00a a a c1c c1 1
b 00bbb b b aa1 11 1
c 00bbb c c aad 11 1
d 0abbd d d 0ac c1 1
1 0abcd 1 1 0ab cd 1
The reader may check that A is integral and v-distributive but the order structure
is the one in Fig. 1. Hence A is an integral v-distributive residuated semilattice that
is not distributive; thus by Theorem 1 it cannot be divisible.
We close this section with an observation. Let V be the variety of integral, com-
mutative and v-distributive residuated semilattices. By Theorem 2 V is axiomatized,
modulo integral and commutative residuated semilattices, by the single equation

((x → y) → y)(x → y) ≈ y.

By Lemma 2, V contains the variety H of hoops and by the example above it contains
it properly. By some preliminary results, too raw to be reported here, it seems that V
inherits some interesting properties from the variety of hoops. This is a path that we
intend to follow in future investigations.

Acknowledgements We thank Peter Jipsen for drawing our attention to the paper [14], thus orig-
inating this investigation. We thank also the anonymous referee who caught a mistake in the first
version and forced us to write a much better paper.
20 P. Aglianò

References

1. P. Aglianò, A short note on divisible residuated semilattices, 2019, To appear in Soft Computing
2. P. Aglianò, I. Ferreirim, F. Montagna, Basic hoops: an algebraic study of continuous t-norms.
Studia Logica 87, 73–98 (2007)
3. P. Aglianò, S. Ugolini, MTL-algebras as rotations of basic hoops. J. Logic Comput. (2019).
https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exz005
4. W.J. Blok, I. Ferreirim, On the structure of hoops. Algebra Univ. 43, 233–257 (2000)
5. K. Blount, C. Tsinakis, The structure of residuated lattices. Internat. J. Algebra Comput. 13(4),
437–461 (2003)
6. M. Busaniche, R. Cignoli, Constructive logic with strong negation as a substructural logic. J.
Logic Comput. 20, 761–793 (2008)
7. M. Busaniche, M. Marcos, S. Ugolini, Representation by triples of algebras with an MV-retract.
Fuzzy Sets Syst. (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fss.2018.10.024
8. A. Dvurečenskij, T. Vetterlein, Pseudoeffect algebras I. Basic properties. Inter. J. Theor. Phys.
40, 685–701 (2001)
9. N. Galatos, C. Tsinakis, Generalized MV-algebras. J. Algebra 283, 254–291 (2005)
10. S. Jenei, On the structure of rotation-invariant semigroups. Arch. Math. Logic 42, 489–514
(2003)
11. P. Jipsen, C. Tsinakis, A survey of residuated lattices, in Ordered Algebraic Strucures, ed. by
J. Martinez (Kluwer Academic Publisher, Dordrecht, 1982), pp. 19–56
12. J. Rhodes, Modular and distributive semilattices. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 201, 31–41 (1975)
13. C. Van Alten, Representable Biresiduated Lattices. J. Algebra 247, 672–691 (2002)
14. J. Varlet, On distributive residuated groupoids. Semigroup Forum 6, 80–85 (1973)
On Distributive Join Semilattices

Rodolfo C. Ertola-Biraben, Francesc Esteva, and Lluís Godo

Abstract Motivated by Gentzen’s disjunction elimination rule in his Natural Deduc-

tion calculus and reading inequalities with meet in a natural way, we conceive a notion
of distributivity for join semilattices. We prove that it is equivalent to a notion present
in the literature. In the way, we prove that all notions of distributivity for join semi-
lattices we have found in the literature are linearly ordered. We finally consider the
notion of distributivity in join semilattices with arrow, that is, the algebraic structure
corresponding to the disjunction-conditional fragment of intuitionistic logic.

1 Introduction

Different notions of distributivity for semilattices have been proposed in the literature
as a generalization of the usual distributive property for lattices. As far as we know,
notions of distributivity for semilattices have been given, in chronological order, by
Grätzer and Schmidt [9] in 1962, by Katriňák [12] in 1968, by Balbes [1] in 1969,
by Schein [16] in 1972, by Hickman [11] in 1984, and by Larmerová and Rachůnek
[14] in 1988. Following the names of its authors, we will use the terminology GS-,
K-, B-, Sn -, H-, and LR-distributivity, respectively.
In this paper, motivated by Gentzen’s disjunction elimination rule in his Natural
Deduction calculus, and reading inequalities with meet in a natural way, we conceive
another notion of distributivity for join semilattices, that we call ND-distributivity.
We aim to find out whether it is equivalent to any of the notions already present in
the literature. In doing so, we also compare the different notions of distributivity for

R. C. Ertola-Biraben (B)
CLE-UNICAMP, Campinas, SP 13083-859, Brazil
e-mail: [email protected]
F. Esteva · L. Godo
IIIA-CSIC, 08193 Belaterra, Spain
e-mail: [email protected]
L. Godo
e-mail: [email protected]

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 21

D. Fazio et al. (eds.), Algebraic Perspectives on Substructural Logics,
Trends in Logic 55, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52163-9_3
Random documents with unrelated
content Scribd suggests to you:
The Project Gutenberg eBook of Falcons of
Narabedla
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States
and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
ebook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
you are located before using this eBook.

Title: Falcons of Narabedla

Author: Marion Zimmer Bradley

Release date: November 28, 2015 [eBook #50566]

Most recently updated: October 22, 2024

Language: English

Credits: Produced by Greg Weeks, Mary Meehan and the Online

Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK FALCONS OF

NARABEDLA ***
 Somewhere on the Time Ellipse Mike Kenscott became
Adric;
and the only way to return to his own identity was to find
the Keep of the Dreamer, and loose the terrible

FALCONS of NARABEDLA

By Marion Zimmer Bradley

[Transcriber's Note: This etext was produced from Other

Worlds
May 1957. Extensive research did not uncover any evidence
that
the U.S. copyright on this publication was renewed.]
 Contents
CHAPTER ONE
CHAPTER TWO
CHAPTER THREE
CHAPTER FOUR
CHAPTER FIVE
CHAPTER SIX
CHAPTER SEVEN
CHAPTER EIGHT
CHAPTER NINE
CHAPTER TEN
CHAPTER ELEVEN
 CHAPTER ONE
Voltage—from Nowhere!

Somewhere on the crags above us I heard a big bird scream.

I turned to Andy, knee-deep in the icy stream beside me. "There's
your eagle. Probably smells that cougar I shot yesterday." I started
to reel in my line, knowing what my brother's next move would be.
"Get the camera, and we'll try for a picture."
We crouched together in the underbrush, watching, as the big bird
of prey wheeled down in a slow spiral toward the dead cougar. Andy
was trembling with excitement, the camera poised against his chest,
his eyes glued in the image-finder. "Golly—" he whispered, almost
prayerfully, "six foot wing spread—maybe more—"
The bird screamed again, warily, head cocked into the wind. We
were to leeward; the scent of the carrion masked our enemy smell
from him. The eagle failed to scent or to see us, swooping down and
dropping on the cougar's head. Andy's camera clicked twice. The
eagle thrust in its beak—
A red-hot wire flared in my brain. The bird—the bird—I leaped out of
cover, running swiftly across the ten-foot clearing that separated us
from the attacking eagle, my hand tugging automatically at the
hunting knife in my belt. Andy's shout of surprised anger was a
faraway noise in my ears as the eagle started away with flapping,
angry wings—then, in fury, swept down at me, pinions beating
around my head. I heard and felt the wicked beak dart in, and thrust
blindly upward with the knife, ripped, slashing, hearing the bird's
scream of pain and the flapping of wide wings. A red haze spun
around me—
Then the screaming eagle was gone and Andy's angry grip was on
my shoulder, shaking me roughly. His voice, furious and frightened,
was hardly recognizable. "Mike! Mike, you darned idiot, are you all
right? You must be crazy!"
I blinked, rubbing my hand across my eyes. The hand came away
wet. I was standing in the clearing, the knife in my hand red with
blood. Bird blood. I heard myself ask, stupidly, "What happened?"
My brother's face came clear out of the thickness in my mind,
scowling wrathfully. "You tell me what happened! Mike, what in the
devil were you thinking about? You told me yourself that an eagle
will attack a man if he's bothered. I had him square in the camera
when you jumped out of there like a bat out of a belfry and went for
the eagle with your knife! You must be clean crazy!"
I let the knife drop out of my hand. "Yeah—" I said heavily, "Yeah, I
guess I spoiled your picture, Andy. I'm sorry—I didn't—" my voice
trailed off, helpless. The boy's hand was still on my shoulder; he let
it drop and knelt in the grass, groping there for his camera. "That's
all right, Mike," he said in a dead voice, "you scared the daylights
out of me, that's all." He stood up swiftly, looking straight into my
face. "Darn it, Mike, you've been acting crazy for a week! I don't
mind the blamed camera, but when you start going for eagles with
your bare hands—" abruptly he flung the camera away, turned and
began to run down the slope in the direction of the cabin.
I took a step to follow, then stopped, bending to retrieve the broken
pieces of Andy's cherished camera. The kid must have hit the eagle
with it. Lucky thing for me; an eagle can be a mean bird. But why,
why in the living hell had I done a thing like that? I'd warned Andy
time and time again to stay clear of the big birds. Now that the
urgency of action had deserted me, I felt stupid and a little
lightheaded. I didn't wonder Andy thought I was crazy. I thought so
myself more than half the time. I stowed the broken camera in my
tackle box, mentally promising Andy a better one; hunted up the
abandoned lines and poles, carefully stowed them, cleaned our day's
catch. It was dark before I started for the cabin; I could hear the
hum of the electric dynamo I'd rigged up and see the electric light
across the dusk of the Sierras. A smell of bacon greeted me as I
crossed into the glare of the unshielded bulb. Andy was standing at
the cookstove, his back stubbornly to me. He did not turn.
"Andy—" I said.
"It's okay, Mike. Sit down and eat your supper. I didn't wait for the
fish."
"Andy—I'll get you another camera—"
"I said, it's okay. Now, damn it, eat."
He didn't speak again for a long time; but as I stretched back for a
second mug of coffee, he got up and began to walk around the
room, restlessly. "Mike—" he said entreatingly, "you came here for a
rest! Why can't you lay off your everlasting work for a while and
relax?" He looked disgustedly over his shoulder at the work table
where the light spilled over a confused litter of wires and magnets
and coils. "You've turned this place into a branch office of General
Electric!"
"I can't stop now!" I said violently. "I'm on the track of something—
and if I stop I'll never find it!"
"Must be real important," Andy said sourly, "if it makes you act like
bughouse bait."
I shrugged without answering. We'd been over that before. I'd
known it when they threw me out of the government lab, just after
the big blowup. I thought, angrily. I'm heading for another one, but
I don't care.
"Sit down, Andy," I told him. "You don't know what happened down
there. Now that the war's over, it's no military secret, and I'll tell you
what happened."
I paused, swallowing down the coffee, not knowing that it scalded
my mouth. "That is—I will if I can."
Six months before they settled the war in Korea, I was working in a
government radio lab, on some new communications equipment.
Since I never finished it, there's no point in going into details; it's
enough to say it would have made radar as obsolete as the
stagecoach. I'd built a special supersonic condenser, and had had
trouble with a set of magnetic coils that wouldn't wind properly.
When the thing blew up I hadn't had any sleep for three nights, but
that wasn't the reason. I was normal then; just another
communications man, intent on radio and this new equipment and
without any of the crazy impractical notions that had lost me my job
later. They called it overwork, but I knew they thought the explosion
had disturbed my brain. I didn't blame them. I would have liked to
think so.
It started one day in the lab with a shadow on the sun and an
elusive short circuit that gave me shock after shock until I was
jittery. By the time I had it fixed, the oscillator had gone out of
control. I got a series of low-frequency waves that were like nothing
I'd ever seen before. Then there was something like a voice
speaking out of a very old, jerry-built amateur radio set. Except that
there wasn't a receiver in the lab, and no one else had heard it. I
wasn't sure myself, because right then every instrument in the place
went haywire and five minutes later, part of the ceiling hit the floor
and the floor went up through the roof. They found me, they say,
lying half-crushed under a beam, and I woke up eighteen hours later
in a hospital with four cracked ribs, and a feeling as if I'd had a lot of
voltage poured into me. It went in the report that I'd been struck by
lightning.
It took me a long time to get well. The ribs healed fast—faster than
the doctor liked. I didn't mind the hospital part, except that I
couldn't walk without shaking, or light a cigarette without burning
myself, for months. The thing I minded was what I remembered
before I woke up. Delirium; that was what they told me. But the
kind and type of scars on my body didn't ring true. Electricity—
even freak lightning—doesn't make that kind of burns. And my
corner of the world doesn't make a habit of branding people.
But before I could show the scars to anybody outside the hospital,
they were gone. Not healed; just gone. I remembered the look on
the medic's face when I showed him the place where the scars had
been. He didn't think I was crazy; he thought he was.
I knew the lab hadn't been struck by lightning. The Major knew it
too; I found that out the day I reported back to work. All the time
we talked, his big pen moved in stubby circles across the page of his
log-book, and he talked without raising his head to look at me.
"I know all that, Kenscott. No electrical storms reported in the
vicinity; no radio disturbance within a thousand miles. But—" his jaw
grew stubborn, "the lab was wrecked and you were hurt. We've got
to have something for the record."
I could understand all that. What I resented was the way they
treated me after I went back to work. They transferred me to
another division and another line of work. They turned down my
request to follow up those nontypical waves. My private notes were
ripped out of my notebook while I was at lunch and I never saw
them again. And as soon as they could, they shipped me to
Fairbanks, Alaska, and that was the end of that.
The Major told me all I needed to know, the day before I took the
plane to Alaska. His scowl said more than his words, and they said
plenty. "I'd let it alone, Kenscott. No sense stirring up more trouble.
We can't bother with side alleys, anyhow. Next time you monkey
with it, you might get your head blown off, not just a dose of stray
voltage out of the blue. We've done everything but stand on our
heads trying to find out where that spare energy came from—and
where it went. But we've marked that whole line of research closed,
Kenscott. If I were you, I'd keep my mouth shut about it."
"It wasn't a message from Mars," I suggested unsmiling, and he
didn't think that was funny either. But there was relief on his face as
I left the office and went to clean out my drawer.
I got along all right in Alaska, for a while. But I wasn't the same.
The armistice had hardly been signed when they sent me back to
the States with a recommendation of overwork. I tried to explain it
to Andy. "They said I needed a rest. Maybe so. The shock did
something funny to me ... tore me open ... like the electric shock
treatments they give catatonic patients. I know a lot of things I
never learned. Ordinary radio work doesn't mean anything to me any
more. It doesn't make sense. When people out west were talking
about flying saucers or whatever they were—and when they talked
about weather disturbances after the atomic tests, things did make
sense for a while. And when we came down here—" I paused, trying
to fit confused impressions together. He wasn't going to believe me,
anyhow, but I wanted him to. A tree slapped against the cabin
window; I jumped. "It started up again the day we came up in the
mountains. Energy out of nowhere, following me around. It can't
knock me out. Have you noticed I let you turn the lights on and off?
The day we came up, I shorted my electric razor and blew out five
fuses trying to change one."
"Yeah, I remember, you had to drive to town for them—" My
brother's eyes watched me, uneasy. "Mike, you're kidding—"
"I wish I were," I said. "That energy just drains into me, and nothing
happens. I'm immune." I shrugged, rose and walked across to the
radio I'd put in here, so carefully, before the war. I picked up the
disconnected plug; thrust it into the socket. I snapped the dial on.
"I'll show you," I told him.
The panel flashed and darkened; confused static came cracking from
the speaker, erratic. I took my hand away.
"Turn it up—" Andy said uneasily.
My hand twiddled the dial. "It's already up."
"Try another station;" the kid insisted stubbornly. I pushed all the
buttons in succession; the static crackled and buzzed, the panel light
flickered on and off in little cryptic flashes. I sighed. "And reception
was perfect at noon," I told him, "You were listening to the news." I
took my hand away again. "I don't want to blow the thing up."
Andy came over and switched the button back on. The little panel
light glowed steadily, and the mellow voice of Milton Cross filled the
room ... "now conduct the Boston Philharmonic Orchestra in the Fifth
or 'Fate' symphony of Ludwig von Beethoven ..." the noise of mixed
applause, and then the majestic chords of the symphony, thundering
through the rooms of the cabin.
"Ta-da-da-dumm——Ta-da-da-DUMM!"
My brother stared at me as racing woodwinds caught up with the
brasses. There was nothing wrong with the radio. "Mike. What did
you do to it?"
"I wish I knew," I told him. Reaching, I touched the volume button
again.
Beethoven died in a muttering static like a thousand drums.
I swore and Andy sucked in his breath between his teeth, edging
warily backward. He touched the dials again; once more the
smoothness of the "Fate" symphony rolled out and swallowed us. I
shivered.
"You'd better let it alone!" Andy said shakily.
The kid turned in early, but I stayed in the main room, smoking
restlessly and wishing I could get a drink without driving eighty miles
over bad mountain roads. Neither of us had thought to turn off the
radio; it was moaning out some interminable throbbing jazz. I turned
over my notes, restlessly, not really seeing them. Once Andy's voice
came sleepily from the alcove.
"Going to read all night, Mike?"
"If I feel like it," I said tersely and began walking up and down
again.
"Michael! For the luvvagod stop it and let me get some sleep!" Andy
exploded, and I sank down in the chair again. "Sorry, Andy."
Where had the intangible part of me been, those eighteen hours
when I first lay crushed under a fallen beam, then under morphine
in the hospital? Where had those scars come from? More important,
what had made a radio lab blow up in the first place? Electricity sets
fires; it shocks men into insensibility or death. It doesn't explode.
Radio waves are in themselves harmless. Most important of all, what
maniac freak of lightning was I carrying in my body that made me
immune to electrical current? I hadn't told Andy about the time I'd
deliberately grounded the electric dynamo in the cellar and taken the
whole voltage in my body. I was still alive. It would have been a hell
of a way to commit suicide—but I hadn't.
I swore, slamming down the window. I was going to bed. Andy was
right. Either I was crazy or there was something wrong; in any case,
sitting here wouldn't help. If it didn't let up, I'd take the first train
home and see a good electrician—or a psychiatrist. But right now, I
was going to hit the sack.
My hand went out automatically and switched the light off.
"Damn!" I thought incredulously. I'd shorted the dynamo again. The
radio stopped as if the whole orchestra had dropped dead; every
light in the cabin winked swiftly out, but my hand on the switch
crackled with a phosphorescent glow as the entire house current
poured into my body. I tingled with weird shock; I heard my own
teeth chattering.
And something snapped wide open in my brain. I heard, suddenly,
an excited voice, shouting.
"Rhys! Rhys! That is the man!"
 CHAPTER TWO
Rainbow City

"You are mad," said the man with the tired voice.
I was drifting. I was swaying, bodiless, over a huge abyss of
caverned space; chasmed, immense, limitless. Vaguely, through a
sleeping distance, I heard two voices. This one was old and very
tired.
"You are mad. They will know. Narayan will know."
"Narayan is a fool," said the second voice.
"Narayan is the Dreamer," the tired voice said. "He is the Dreamer,
and where the Dreamer walks he will know. But have it your way. I
am very old and it does not matter. I give you this power, freely—to
spare you. But Gamine—"
"Gamine—" the second voice stopped. After a long time, "You are
old, and a fool, Rhys," it said. "What is Gamine to me?"
Bodiless, blind, I drifted and swayed and swung in the sound of the
voices. The humming, like a million high-tension wires, sang around
me and I felt myself cradled in the pull of a great magnet that held
me suspended surely on nothingness and drew me down into the
field of some force beneath. Far below me the voices faded. I swung
free—fell—plunged downward in sickening motion, head over heels,
into the abyss....
My feet struck hard flooring. I wrenched back to consciousness with
a jolt. Winds blew coldly in my face; the cabin walls had been flung
back to the high-lying stars. I was standing at a barred window at
the very pinnacle of a tall tower, in the lap of a weird blueness that
arched flickeringly in the night. I caught a glimpse of a startled face,
a lean tired old face beneath a peaked hood, in the moment before
my knees gave way and I fell, striking my head against the bars of
the window.
I was lying on a narrow, high bed in a room filled with doors and
bars. I could see the edge of a carved mirror set in a frame, and the
top of a chest of some kind. On a bench at the edge of my field of
vision there were two figures sitting. One was the old grey man,
hunched wearily beneath his robe, wearing robes like a Tibetan
Lama's, somber black, and a peaked hood of grey. The other was a
slimmer younger figure, swathed in silken silvery veiling, with a thin
opacity where the face should have been, and a sort of opalescent
shine of flesh through the silvery-sapphire silks. The figure was that
of a boy or a slim immature girl; it sat erect, motionless, and for a
long time I studied it, curious, between half-opened lids. But when I
blinked, it rose and passed through one of the multitudinous doors;
at once a soft sibilance of draperies announced return. I sat up,
getting my feet to the floor, or almost there; the bed was higher
than a hospital bed. The blue-robe held a handled mug, like a baby's
drinking-cup, at me. I took it in my hand hesitated—
"Neither drug nor poison," said the blue-robe mockingly, and the
voice was as noncommittal as the veiled body; a sexless voice, soft
alto, a woman's or a boy's. "Drink and be glad it is none of Karamy's
brewing."
I tasted the liquid in the mug; it had an indeterminate greenish look
and a faint pungent taste I could not identify, although it reminded
me variously of anise and garlic. It seemed to remove the last traces
of shock. I handed the cup back empty and looked sharply at the old
man in the Lama costume.
"You're—Rhys?" I said. "Where in hell have I gotten to?" At least,
that's what I meant to say. Imagine my surprise when I found
myself asking—in a language I'd never heard, but understood
perfectly—"To which of the domains of Zandru have I been
consigned now?" At the same moment I became conscious of what I
was wearing. It seemed to be an old-fashioned nightshirt, chopped
off at the loins, deep crimson in color. "Red flannels yet!" I thought
with a gulp of dismay. I checked my impulse to get out of bed. Who
could act sane in a red nightshirt?
"You might have the decency to explain where I am," I said. "If you
know."
The tiredness seemed part of Rhys voice. "Adric," he said wearily.
"Try to remember." He shrugged his lean shoulders. "You are in your
own Tower. And you have been under restraint again. I am sorry."
His voice sounded futile. I felt prickling shivers run down my
backbone. In spite of the weird surroundings, the phrase "under
restraint" had struck home. I was a lunatic in an asylum.
The blue-robed one cut in in that smooth, sexless, faint-sarcastic
voice. "While Karamy holds the amnesia-ray, Rhys, you will be
explaining it to him a dozen times a cycle. He will never be of use to
us again. This time Karamy won. Adric; try to remember. You are at
home, in Narabedla."
I shook my head. Nightshirt or no nightshirt, I'd face this on my feet.
I walked to Rhys; put my clenched hands on his shoulders. "Explain
this! Who am I supposed to be? You called me Adric. I'm no more
Adric than you are!"
"Adric, you are not amusing!" The blue-robe's voice was edged with
anger. "Use what intelligence you have left! You have had enough
sharig antidote to cure a tharl. Now. Who are you?"
The words were meaningless. I stared, trapped. I clung to hold on to
identity. "Adric—" I said, bewildered. That was my name. Was it?
Wasn't it? No. I was Mike Kenscott. Hang on to that. Two and two
are four. The circumference equals the radius squared times pi. Four
rulls is the chemming of twilp—stop that! Mike Kenscott. Summer
1954. Army serial number 13-48746. Karamy. I cradled my bursting
head in my hands. "I'm crazy. Or you are. Or we're both sane and
this monkey-business is all real."
"It is real," said Rhys, compassion in his tired face. "He has been
very far on the Time Ellipse, Gamine. Adric, try to understand. This
was Karamy's work. She sent you out on a time line, far, very far into
the past. Into a time when the Earth was different—she hoped you
would come back changed, or mad." His eyes brooded. "I think she
succeeded. Gamine, I have long outstayed my leave. I must return
to my own tower—or die. Will you explain?"
"I will." A hint of emotion flickered in the voice of Gamine. "Go,
Master."
Rhys left the room, through one of the doors. Gamine turned
impatiently to me again. "We waste time this way. Fool, look at
yourself!"
I strode to a mirror that lined one of the doors. Above the crimson
nightshirt I saw a face—not my own. The sight rocked my mind. Out
of the mirror a man's face looked anxiously; a face eagle-thin, darkly
moustached, with sharp green eyes. The body belonging to the face
that was not mine was lean and long and strongly muscled—and not
quite human. I squeezed my eyes shut. This couldn't be—I opened
my eyes. The man in the red nightshirt I was wearing was still
reflected there.
I turned my back on the mirror, walking to one of the barred
windows to look down on the familiar outline of the Sierra Madre,
about a hundred miles away. I couldn't have been mistaken. I knew
that ridge of mountains. But between me and the mountains lay a
thickly forested expanse of land which looked like no scenery I had
ever seen in my life. I was standing near the pinnacle of a high
tower; I dimly saw the curve of another, just out of my line of vision.
The whole landscape was bathed in a curiously pinkish light; through
an overcast sky I could just make out, dimly, the shadowy disk of a
watery red sun. Then—no, I wasn't dreaming, I really did see it—
beyond it, a second sun; blue-white, shining brilliantly, pallid through
the clouds, but brighter than any sunlight I had ever seen.
It was proof enough for me. I turned desperately to Gamine behind
me. "Where have I gotten, to? Where—when am I? Two suns—
those mountains—"
The change in Gamine's voice was swift; the veiled face lifted
questioningly to mine. What I had thought a veil was not that; it
seemed to be more like a shimmering screen wrapped around the
features so that Gamine was faceless, an invisible person with
substance but no apprehensible characteristics. Yes, it was like that;
as if there was an invisible person wearing the curious silken
draperies. But the invisible flesh was solid enough. Hands like cold
steel gripped my shoulders. "You have been back? Back to the days
before the second sun? Adric, tell me; did Earth truly have but one
sun?"
"Wait—" I begged. "You mean I've travelled in time?"
The exultation faded from Gamine's voice imperceptibly. "Never
mind. It is improbable in any case. No, Adric; not really travelling.
You were only sent out on the Time Ellipse, till you contacted some
one in that other Time. Perhaps you stayed in contact with his mind
so long that you think you are he?"
"I'm not Adric—" I raged. "Adric sent me here—"
I saw the blurring around Gamine's invisible features twitch in a
headshake. "It's never been proven that two minds can be
interchanged like that. Adric's body. Adric's brain. The brain
convolutions, the memory centers, the habit patterns—you'd still be
Adric. The idea that you are someone else is only an illusion of your
conscious mind. It will wear off."
I shook my head, puzzled. "I still don't believe it. Where am I?"
Gamine moved impatiently. "Oh, very well. You are Adric of
Narabedla; and if you are sane again, Lord of the Crimson Tower. I
am Gamine." The swathed shoulders moved a little. "You don't
remember? I am a spell-singer."
I jerked my elbow toward the window. "Those are my own
mountains out there," I said roughly. "I'm not Adric, whoever he is.
My name's Mike Kenscott, and your hanky-panky doesn't impress
me. Take off that veil and let me see your face."
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

textbookfull.com