The post that was quoted here has been removedNot every set has a defined product, but the OP states that there is a product defined in the set. He assumes you know what 'product' means in this instance. He has not said that the set in question is a group under any given operation, and I assume it is not a requirement of the problem.
If you want to talk about a 'product', then you must define an operation upon elements of the set.
Yes, that is what he did.
The post that was quoted here has been removedA group is necessarily associative, so that is why DeepThought doesn't give that the set is a group.
EDIT: While I have not given any thought to DeepThought's riddle, there is a fair chance his solution runs on the assumption that the set S is "closed" under the product. That is, if a,b ∈ S, then a*b ∈ S.
Originally posted by SoothfastI think technically it's a module since I've implicitly got addition defined (otherwise -a*b doesn't make sense). I didn't want to give any more information in the question than was necessary. The stuff about at least one case where a*b != a*c was to rule out a trivial case (where a*b = 0 for all elements in the set, when it is trivially associative).
A group is necessarily associative, so that is why DeepThought doesn't give that the set is a group.
EDIT: While I have not given any thought to DeepThought's riddle, there is a fair chance his solution runs on the assumption that the set S is "closed" under the product. That is, if a,b ∈ S, then a*b ∈ S.
Yes I think I'd better make it closed under the operation (as I'm not certain of the effects of not doing that, and certainly the specific example I generalised from has that property) - although I don't think that that is necessary for the answer.
Drat, didn't think it through enough I need to add two extra conditions. It's best if I restate the problem:
Let S be a set which is closed under the product * and has the following properties:
Anti-commutivity a*b = -b*a
If a and b are different elements then a*b != 0
a*b != a and a*b !=b for all a and b.
Show that S is not associative under '*'
Sorry, I tried to abstract away from a specific example and worried about trivial cases instead of whether I'd given enough information. The extra two conditions may overspecify it, but I wanted to make it different to the specific case I based it on to prevent people just looking the answer up on Wikipedia.
The post that was quoted here has been removedIt's a module under addition and multiplication by a scalar, with a product operation which is anti-commutative. In the restated problem - I didn't give enough information - I'm not relying on the multiplication by a scalar so it need only be an abelian group under addition.
The problem is now easy, where before hand it's probably not possible.