MHB Matrix Rings - Exercise 1.1.4 (ii) - Berrick and Keating (B&K) - page 12

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading An Introduction to Rings and Modules With K-Theory in View by A.J. Berrick and M.E. Keating (B&K).

I need help with Exercise 1.1.4 (ii) (Chapter 1: Basics, page 13) concerning matrix rings ... ...

Exercise 1.1.4 (ii) (page 13) reads as follows:
View attachment 2984
I need help with Exercise (ii) above ... indeed I have not been able to progress beyond defining the terms of the problem as follows:Now, the centre of a matrix ring $$M_n (R)$$ over a ring $$R$$ is as follows:

$$ Z(M_n (R)) = \{ A \in M_n (R) \ | \ AM = MA \ \ \forall \ M \in M_n (R) \}$$

We need to show that

$$A \in Z(M_n (R)) \Longleftrightarrow A = aI \ \ \forall \ M \in M_n (R)$$

So, to begin, assume $$A \in Z(M_n (R))$$ ...

Then

$$A \in Z(M_n (R)) \Longrightarrow AM= MA$$

Now we know $$A$$ can be written

$$A = \sum_{h,i} a_{hi} e_{hi}$$ ...

BUT ... where to from here ...

Can someone please help?

***EDIT***

I have been reflecting on this exercise and the proof "the other way" seems easier - that is to show that:

$$ A = aI \text{ with a } \in Z(R) \Longrightarrow A \in Z(M_n (R)) $$

Assume $$A = aI$$ with $$a \in Z(R)$$

Then

$$A = aI \Longrightarrow AM = aIM = aM$$ for any $$M \in M_n (R)$$

Now $$aM = \begin{pmatrix} a m_{11} & a m_{12} & ... & ... & a m_{1n} \\ a m_{21} & a m_{22} & ... & ... & a m_{2n} \\ ... & ... & ... & ... & ... \\ ... & ... & ... & ... & ... \\ a m_{n1} & a m_{n2} & ... & ... & a m_{nn} \end{pmatrix}$$

But $$am_{ij} = m_{ij}a$$ since$$ a \in Z(R) $$

Thus $$aM = \begin{pmatrix} m_{11}a & m_{12}a & ... & ... & m_{1n} a \\ m_{21} a & m_{22} a & ... & ... & m_{2n} a \\ ... & ... & ... & ... & ... \\ ... & ... & ... & ... & ... \\ m_{n1} a & m_{n2} a & ... & ... & m_{nn} a \end{pmatrix} = Ma$$

Thus we have $$AM = aIM = aM = Ma = MIa $$

Can someone please critique this proof of the fact that:

$$ A = aI with a \in Z(R) \Longrightarrow A \in Z(M_n (R)) $$

Hope someone can help ... ...

Peter
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
It should be clear that if $A = aI$ that:

$AM = (aI)M = a(IM) = a(MI) = (aM)I$

now since $a \in Z(R)$, we have:

$\displaystyle aM = a\left(\sum_{h,i} a_{hi}e_{hi}\right) = \sum_{h,i} a(a_{hi}e_{hi})$

$\displaystyle = \sum_{h,i} (a_{hi}e_{hi})a = \left(\sum_{h,i} a_{hi}e_{hi}\right)a = Ma$.

Hence: $(aM)I = (Ma)I = M(aI) = MA$.

So the center of the matrix ring clearly contains all such matrices.

Of course, this is the "easy part".

To do the other way, I find it helpful to consider two cases.

Case 1: $A$ is diagonal, but not equal to $aI$ for any $a \in Z(R)$.

Case 1a: $A = bI$ for some $b \not \in Z(R)$. Then there is some $c \in R$ with $bc \neq cb$.

Then $A(cI) = (bI)(cI) = (bc)I \neq (cb)I = (cI)(bI) = (cI)A$, so $A$ does not commute with $cI$.

Case 1b: $A = \text{diag}(a_1,a_2,\dots,a_n)$ with $a_i \neq a_j$ for some $i \neq j$.

In this case, we have (I am going to use capital letters for the $e$ matrices to underscore that these are matrices, not ring-elements):

$A(E_{ij}) = a_jE_{ij}$ whereas:

$(E_{ij})A = a_iE_{ij}$, and these are unequal, so $A$ does not commute with $E_{ij}$.

Case 2: $A$ is not diagonal. Suppose that we have $a_{ij} \neq 0$ for $i \neq j$.

If we denote $A(E_{jk})$ by $B$, we have:

$\displaystyle b_{ik} = \sum_n a_{in}e_{nk} = a_{ij} \neq 0$.

Similarly, if we denote $(E_{jk})A$ by $C$, we have:

$\displaystyle c_{ik} = \sum_n e_{in}a_{nk} = 0$, since $e_{in} = 0$ for all $i \neq j$ and any $n$.

Since $B$ and $C$ differ in the $i,k$-entry, they cannot be equal. Hence $A$ does not commute with $E_{jk}$.

So ONLY those matrices of the form $aI$ are in the center (for every other matrix, we have at least one matrix it doesn't commute with).

Since the mapping $Z(R) \to Z(M_n(R))$ given by $a \mapsto aI$ is a ring-monomorphism, it is common practice to identify these two objects, and say $Z(R)$ IS the center $Z(M_n(R))$. This essentially allows us to obtain $M_n(R)$ as an extension ring of $Z(R)$, something that becomes important when $R$ is a field.
 
Deveno said:
It should be clear that if $A = aI$ that:

$AM = (aI)M = a(IM) = a(MI) = (aM)I$

now since $a \in Z(R)$, we have:

$\displaystyle aM = a\left(\sum_{h,i} a_{hi}e_{hi}\right) = \sum_{h,i} a(a_{hi}e_{hi})$

$\displaystyle = \sum_{h,i} (a_{hi}e_{hi})a = \left(\sum_{h,i} a_{hi}e_{hi}\right)a = Ma$.

Hence: $(aM)I = (Ma)I = M(aI) = MA$.

So the center of the matrix ring clearly contains all such matrices.

Of course, this is the "easy part".

To do the other way, I find it helpful to consider two cases.

Case 1: $A$ is diagonal, but not equal to $aI$ for any $a \in Z(R)$.

Case 1a: $A = bI$ for some $b \not \in Z(R)$. Then there is some $c \in R$ with $bc \neq cb$.

Then $A(cI) = (bI)(cI) = (bc)I \neq (cb)I = (cI)(bI) = (cI)A$, so $A$ does not commute with $cI$.

Case 1b: $A = \text{diag}(a_1,a_2,\dots,a_n)$ with $a_i \neq a_j$ for some $i \neq j$.

In this case, we have (I am going to use capital letters for the $e$ matrices to underscore that these are matrices, not ring-elements):

$A(E_{ij}) = a_jE_{ij}$ whereas:

$(E_{ij})A = a_iE_{ij}$, and these are unequal, so $A$ does not commute with $E_{ij}$.

Case 2: $A$ is not diagonal. Suppose that we have $a_{ij} \neq 0$ for $i \neq j$.

If we denote $A(E_{jk})$ by $B$, we have:

$\displaystyle b_{ik} = \sum_n a_{in}e_{nk} = a_{ij} \neq 0$.

Similarly, if we denote $(E_{jk})A$ by $C$, we have:

$\displaystyle c_{ik} = \sum_n e_{in}a_{nk} = 0$, since $e_{in} = 0$ for all $i \neq j$ and any $n$.

Since $B$ and $C$ differ in the $i,k$-entry, they cannot be equal. Hence $A$ does not commute with $E_{jk}$.

So ONLY those matrices of the form $aI$ are in the center (for every other matrix, we have at least one matrix it doesn't commute with).

Since the mapping $Z(R) \to Z(M_n(R))$ given by $a \mapsto aI$ is a ring-monomorphism, it is common practice to identify these two objects, and say $Z(R)$ IS the center $Z(M_n(R))$. This essentially allows us to obtain $M_n(R)$ as an extension ring of $Z(R)$, something that becomes important when $R$ is a field.

Thanks Deveno ... Appreciate your help ...

Will now be working through the details of your post ...

Thanks again,

Peter
 
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
Back
Top