## Abstract

We review the fact that an MV-algebra is the same thing as a lattice-ordered effect algebra in which disjoint elements are orthogonal. An HMV-algebra is an MV-effect algebra that is also a Heyting algebra and in which the Heyting center and the effect-algebra center coincide. We show that every effect algebra with the generalized comparability property is an HMV-algebra. We prove that, for an MV-effect algebra E, the following conditions are mutually equivalent: (i) E is HMV, (ii) E has a center valued pseudocomplementation, (iii) E admits a central cover mapping γ such that, for all p, q∈E, p∧q=0⇒γ(p)∧q=0.

## Keywords

Cover Mapping Effect Algebra Generalize Comparability Comparability Property Heyting Algebra
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

## REFERENCES

- 1.M.K. Bennett and D.J. Foulis, “Phi-symmetric effect algebras,”
*Found.Phys.***25**(12), 1699–1722 (1995).Google Scholar - 2.M.K. Bennett and D.J. Foulis, “Interval and scale effect algebras,”
*Adv.Appl.Math.***19**, 200–215 (1997).Google Scholar - 3.G. Birkhoff,
*Lattice Theory*, 3rd.ed. (American Mathematical Society colloquium Publications, XXV, Providence, RI, 1967).Google Scholar - 4.P. Busch, P.J. Lahti, and P. Mittlestaedt,
*The Quantum Theory of Measurement*(Springer, Berlin, 1991).Google Scholar - 5.G. Cattaneo and G. Nistico, “Brouwer_Zadeh posets and three-valued 4ukasiewicz posets,”
*Internat.J.Fuzzy Sets and Systems***33**, 165–190 (1989).Google Scholar - 6.C.C. Chang, “Algebraic analysis of many-valued logics,”
*Trans.Am.Math.Soc.***88**, 467–490 (1957).Google Scholar - 7.C.C. Chang, “A new proof of the completeness of 4ukasiewicz axioms,”
*Trans.Am.Math.Soc.***93**, 74–80 (1958).Google Scholar - 8.F. Chovanec and F. Kôpka, “Boolean D-posets,”
*Tatra Mountains Mathematical Publications***10**, 183–197 (1997).Google Scholar - 9.M.L. Dalla Chiara, “Quantum logic,” in
*Handbook of Philosophical Logic III*, D. Gabbay and G. Guenthner, eds.(Reidel, Dordrecht, 1986).Google Scholar - 10.M.L. Dalla Chiara and R. Giuntini, “Paraconsistent quantum logics,”
*Found.Phys.***19**(7), 891–904 (1989).Google Scholar - 11.M.L. Dalla Chiara, G. Cattaneo, and R. Giuntini, “Fuzzy-intuitionisitic quantum logic,”
*Studia Logica***52**, 1–24 (1993).Google Scholar - 12.M.L. Dalla Chiara and R. Giuntini, “Partial and unsharp quantum logics,”
*Found.Phys.***24**(8), 1161–1177 (1994).Google Scholar - 13.M.L. Dalla Chiara and R. Giuntini, “Physical interpretations of the 4ukasiewicz quan-tum logical connectives,” in
*The Foundations of Quantum Mechanics*, C. Garola and A. Rossi, eds.(Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, 1995), pp.179–185.Google Scholar - 14.M.L. Dalla Chiara and R. Giuntini, “Quantum logic, the logician's approach,” in
*Encyclopedia of Applied Physics*, Vol.15, George L. Trigg, ed.(VCH Publishers, Weinheim, Germany, NY, 1996), pp.241–255.Google Scholar - 15.M.R. Darnel,
*Theory of Lattice-Ordered Groups*(Dekker, New York, 1995).Google Scholar - 16.A. Dvurecenskij and S. Pulmannová, “D-test spaces and difference posets,”
*Rep.Math.Phys.***34**(2), 151–170 (1994).Google Scholar - 17.A. Dvurecenskij and H.S. Kim, “On connections between BCK-algebras and difference posets,”
*Studia Logica***60**, 421–439 (1998).Google Scholar - 18.A. Dvurecenskij and M.G. Graziano, “Remarks on representations of minimal clans,”
*Tatra Mountains Mathematical Publications***15**, 31–53 (1998).Google Scholar - 19.D.J. Foulis and M.K. Bennett, “Effect algebras and unsharp quantum logics,”
*Found.Phys.***24**(10), 1325–1346 (1994).Google Scholar - 20.D.J. Foulis, R.J. Greechie, and M.K. Bennett, “The transition to unigroups,”
*Internat.J.Theoret.Phys.***37**(1), 45–63 (1998).Google Scholar - 21.R. Giuntini and H. Greuling, “Toward a formal language for unsharp properties,”
*Found.Phys.***19**(7), 931–945 (1989).Google Scholar - 22.K.R. Goodearl,
*Partially Ordered Abelian Groups with Interpolation*(American Mathe-matical Society, Providence, RI, 1986).Google Scholar - 23.G. Grätzer,
*General Lattice Theory*(Academic, New York, 1978).Google Scholar - 24.R.J. Greechie, D.J. Foulis, and S. Pulmannová, “The center of an effect algebra,”
*Order***12**, 91–106 (1995).Google Scholar - 25.S.P. Gudder,
*Quantum Probability*(Academic, San Diego, 1988).Google Scholar - 26.
- 27.D. Mundici, “Interpretation of AF C
^{*}-algebras in 4ukasiewicz sentential calculus,”*J.Funct.Anal.***65**, 15–63 (1986).Google Scholar - 28.M. Navara and P. Pták, “Difference posets and orthoalgebras,”
*Department of Mathe-matics Report Series, Czech Technical University in Prague, Faculty of Electrical Engineering*, No.93-8, 1–5 (1993).Google Scholar - 29.M. Obeid, “Pasttings and centeria of orthoalgebras,” Ph.D.thesis (Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, 1990).Google Scholar
- 30.K. Ravindran, “On a structure theory of effect algebras,” Ph.D.thesis, Kansas State University (UMI Dissertation Services, No.9629062, Ann Arbor, MI, 1996).Google Scholar
- 31.K. Ravindran, “States on effect algebras that have the 8-symmetry property,”
*Internat.J.Theoret.Phys.***37**(1), 175–181 (1998).Google Scholar - 32.M.H. Stone, “The theory of representations for a Boolean algebra,”
*Trans.AM.Math.Soc.***40**, 37–111 (1936).Google Scholar - 33.M.H. Stone, “Applications of the theory of Boolean rings to general topology,”
*Trans.Am.Math.Soc.***41**, 375–481 (1937).Google Scholar - 34.E.A. Walker, “Stone algebras, conditional events, and three valued logic,”
*IEEE Transac-tions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics***24**(12), 1699–1707 (1994).Google Scholar

## Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 2000