The result was redirect to Cayley–Dickson construction. Not much to merge, so I'll just redirect this. Tone 14:52, 26 December 2009 (UTC) reply
This is an example of the Cayley–Dickson construction applied multiple times. In theory, the construction could be applied an infinite number of times, but the resulting objects are only mathematically significant in the first few cases. We don't need an article on a mathematical concept simply because it is possible to define it. There is no evidence of notability from secondary sources and the article itself simply describes the construction while giving no information that does not directly follow from it. RDBury ( talk) 12:23, 19 December 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Cayley–Dickson construction. Not much to merge, so I'll just redirect this. Tone 14:52, 26 December 2009 (UTC) reply
This is an example of the Cayley–Dickson construction applied multiple times. In theory, the construction could be applied an infinite number of times, but the resulting objects are only mathematically significant in the first few cases. We don't need an article on a mathematical concept simply because it is possible to define it. There is no evidence of notability from secondary sources and the article itself simply describes the construction while giving no information that does not directly follow from it. RDBury ( talk) 12:23, 19 December 2009 (UTC) reply