Are the Only Ideals in M(2, R) Trivial?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter WWGD
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of ideals in the ring of 2x2 matrices with real entries, M(2, R). Participants explore whether the only ideals in this ring are trivial ones, examining proofs and concepts related to invertibility and group actions.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes a proof that the only ideals in M(2, R) are trivial, suggesting that the presence of an invertible matrix would lead to the whole ring being an ideal.
  • Another participant challenges the idea that GL(2, R) acts transitively on M(2, R), providing reasoning based on the properties of invertible and non-invertible matrices.
  • A different approach is suggested, where the participant describes a method to construct a matrix with a specific nonzero entry and manipulate it to show that it generates the whole ring.
  • Clarifications are made regarding the informal use of the term "act" in the context of matrix multiplication and the implications of one-sided ideals in M(2, R).
  • It is noted that there exist nontrivial one-sided ideals in M(2, R), such as matrices with zeros in a specific column, which could complicate the argument about triviality.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of ideals in M(2, R), with some supporting the idea that only trivial ideals exist while others point out the existence of nontrivial one-sided ideals. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the completeness of the proof and the implications of group actions.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the definitions of actions and the properties of ideals, particularly concerning one-sided ideals and the implications of invertibility.

WWGD
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Messages
7,802
Reaction score
13,106
Hi All,
I am trying to show that the only ideals in M (2, ## \mathbb R ##) , the ring of 2x2 matrices with Real entries are the trivial ones.

I have a proof, but I am being kind of lazy rigorizing it. We know we cannot have any matrix in GL(n,##\mathbb R ##), because we can then get the identity and we end up with the whole ring. Basically then, we take any
non-invertible matrix m and we show we can find matrices A,A' in M (2, ## \mathbb R ##) so that Am + Am' is invertible. Is there a way of tightening this?

I thought of using the result that maybe either GL(n, ## \mathbb R ## ), or maybe
M (2,##\mathbb R ##) acts transitively on the left on M (2, ## \mathbb R ##) by multiplication. Is this result true?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Certainly ##GL(2,\mathbb{R})## does not act transitively on ##M(2,\mathbb{R})##. For if ##A## is not invertible, and ##M## is invertible, then ##X = MA## is not invertible (if it were, then ##A = M^{-1}X## would also be invertible). Therefore, if ##A## is not invertible and ##B## is invertible, then ##A## and ##B## are not in the same orbit under this action.

##M(2,\mathbb{R})## is not a group with respect to multiplication, so you have to clarify what you mean by "##M(2,\mathbb{R})## acts on the left".

I don't know of an especially clean proof; the elementary one is straightforward: if ##A \in M(2,\mathbb{R})## has a nonzero entry in row ##i##, column ##j##, then we can premultiply and postmultiply by appropriate elements of ##M(2,\mathbb{R})## to obtain a matrix which has the same nonzero entry at ##i,j## and which has zeros everywhere else. If this nonzero entry is, say, ##a##, then we can multiply (on the left or right) by ##a^{-1}I## to get a matrix with ##1## at ##i,j## and ##0## elsewhere. Then we can move this ##1## wherever we like by multiplying on the left by a row-swapping matrix or on the right by a column-swapping matrix. Therefore, ##\begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0\end{pmatrix}## and ##\begin{pmatrix}0 & 0 \\ 0 & 1\end{pmatrix}## are in the ideal generated by ##A##, and as a result, so is ##I##. So the ideal contains a unit, and is therefore the whole ring.
 
Last edited:
Thanks, sorry, I meant "act" in an informal sense, meaning given any A,B there is C with AC=B , and I meant on M(n,R)- GL(n, R).
 
If you were to make an argument using group actions, I think you would have to consider actions by multiplication on the left and on the right, because ##M(2,\mathbb{R})## does have nontrivial one-sided ideals. For example, the set of all matrices in ##M(2,\mathbb{R})## with zeros in the second column is a left ideal.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K