Proving End($K^2$)=K for A-Module $K^2$

  • MHB
  • Thread starter Fermat1
  • Start date
In summary: KI$. (Note that $E_{11}$ and $E_{22}$ are already $A$-linear, but their sum need not be.)It follows that the map:$\text{End}_K(K^2) \to \text{End}_A(K^2)$$T \mapsto T(\begin{bmatrix}1\\0 \end{bmatrix})$is an isomorphism, and it's easy to work out its inverse. So we have a slightly different characterization of $\text{End}_A(K^2)$:(1) It is the set of all matrices $A$-linear maps $w_{\alpha}$:$w_{\
  • #1
Fermat1
187
0
Let A be the K-algebra of 2 x 2 upper triangular matrices. Thinking of $K^2$ as an A module with the action of matrix multiplication, prove that End($K^2$)=K.

You may use the fact that the centraliser of A consists of all scalar multiples of identity matrix
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Could you please specify if you mean:

$\text{End}_K(K^2)$
$\text{End}_{\Bbb Z}(K^2)$ or:
$\text{End}_A(K^2)$

as all of these are different structures...

I suspect you mean the latter, that is you want $A$-linear maps.
 
  • #3
Deveno said:
Could you please specify if you mean:

$\text{End}_K(K^2)$
$\text{End}_{\Bbb Z}(K^2)$ or:
$\text{End}_A(K^2)$

as all of these are different structures...

I suspect you mean the latter, that is you want $A$-linear maps.

You suspect correctly.
 
  • #4
Here is my idea (I haven't worked through all the details):

1) Show that any $A$-linear map is a $K$-linear map by using the fact that if:

$(x,y) \in K^2, r\in K, L \in \text{End}_A(K^2)$

$L(r(x,y)) = L(\alpha.(x,y)) = \alpha.L(x,y) = r(L(x,y))$

where $\alpha = \begin{bmatrix}r&0\\0&r \end{bmatrix} \in A$.

This means we can represent an $A$-linear map as multiplication by a 2x2 matrix over $K$.

2) Show such a matrix must lie in $A$.

(hint: it suffices to show the map $(x,y) \mapsto (0,kx)$ (for $k \in K \setminus \{0\}$) is not $A$-linear).

3) Use what you are given in the hint concerning $Z(A)$:

If $L(x,y) = \beta.(x,y)$ for some $\beta \in A$ then $A$-linearity means that:

$\alpha.L(x,y) = L(\alpha.(x,y))$ for ANY $\alpha \in A$

$\alpha.(\beta.(x,y)) = \beta.(\alpha.(x,y))$

$(\alpha\beta).(x,y) = (\beta\alpha).(x,y)$

so that $\alpha\beta = \beta\alpha$, that is: $\beta \in Z(A)$.

Note that you wind up with something *isomorphic* to $K$, not equal to it.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
Deveno said:
Here is my idea (I haven't worked through all the details):

1) Show that any $A$-linear map is a $K$-linear map by using the fact that if:

$(x,y) \in K^2, r\in K, L \in \text{End}_A(K^2)$

$L(r(x,y)) = L(\alpha.(x,y)) = \alpha.L(x,y) = r(L(x,y))$

where $\alpha = \begin{bmatrix}r&0\\0&r \end{bmatrix} \in A$.

This means we can represent an $A$-linear map as multiplication by a 2x2 matrix over $K$.

2) Show such a matrix must lie in $A$.

(hint: it suffices to show the map $(x,y) \mapsto (0,kx)$ (for $k \in K \setminus \{0\}$) is not $A$-linear).

3) Use what you are given in the hint concerning $Z(A)$:

If $L(x,y) = \beta.(x,y)$ for some $\beta \in A$ then $A$-linearity means that:

$\alpha.L(x,y) = L(\alpha.(x,y))$ for ANY $\alpha \in A$

$\alpha.(\beta.(x,y)) = \beta.(\alpha.(x,y))$

$(\alpha\beta).(x,y) = (\beta\alpha).(x,y)$

so that $\alpha\beta = \beta\alpha$, that is: $\beta \in Z(A)$.

Note that you wind up with something *isomorphic* to $K$, not equal to it.

Hi Deveno, I have been following out a thought of my own (for once) and tried to show that the map $f:K->End_{A}(M)$ given by $f(t)=w_{t}$ where $w_{t}(x,y)=t(x,y)$ is an isomorphism
Its easy to show that $w_{t}$ is in $End_{A}(M)$. So we need to show $f$ is an isomorphism. Well, it's easy to show $f$ is an algebra homomorphism. The only bit I'm struggling with is showing $f$ is surjective.
 
  • #6
Establishing surjectivity is essentially the "whole problem", because: we don't know much specifically about $\text{End}_A(K^2)$.

That is, it is hard to say what a "typical" $A$-linear endomorphism of $K^2$ looks like.

The fact that an isomorphic copy of $K$ lies within $Z(A)$ is trivial, because $A$ is a $K$-algebra.
 
  • #7
Deveno said:
Establishing surjectivity is essentially the "whole problem", because: we don't know much specifically about $\text{End}_A(K^2)$.

That is, it is hard to say what a "typical" $A$-linear endomorphism of $K^2$ looks like.

The fact that an isomorphic copy of $K$ lies within $Z(A)$ is trivial, because $A$ is a $K$-algebra.

what has the centraliser got to do with surjectivity?
 
  • #8
Ok, to prove your mapping is surjective, you basically have to show that EVERY endomorphism in $\text{End}_A(K^2)$ is of the form $w_t$ (using your notation).

To avoid confusion with the $K$-scalar product, I use $\alpha.(x,y)$ for the $A$-scalar product.

Note that $w_t$ is just the same as multiplying by the $A$ element:

$tI = \begin{bmatrix}t&0\\0&t \end{bmatrix}$.

That is: $w_t(x,y) = t(x,y) = (tI).(x,y)$.

To apply what we know about the centralizer (which is actually kind of a weird thing to call it, since the centralizer of $A$ in $A$ is just the center of $A: Z_A(A) = Z(A)$), we need to know that any $A$-linear map is of the form: $(x,y) \to \alpha.(x,y)$ for some $\alpha \in A$.

An alternative approach: we could use the fact that the centralizer of $A$ in the full $K$-algebra of 2x2 matrices is also $KI$. But to exploit this fact, we need to know FIRST that $A$-linear maps are $K$-linear maps.

But this is easily shown:

For $L \in \text{End}_A(K^2)$ we have:

$tL(x,y) = (tI).L(x,y) = L((tI).(x,y))$ (by $A$-linearity)

$ = L(tx,ty) = L(t(x,y))$.

Now working with $K$-linear maps is much more straight-forward, we already know there is an isomorphism:

$\text{Mat}_{2 \times 2}(K) \cong \text{End}_K(K^2)$

And $A$-linearity imposes upon us the condition that the matrix that represents an $A$-linear map must commute with any matrix representing a $K$-linear map.

If you remain unconvinced, prove to yourself by direct computation that the $K$-linear maps:

$E_{12}:\begin{bmatrix}x\\y \end{bmatrix} \mapsto \begin{bmatrix}0&1\\0&0 \end{bmatrix} \begin{bmatrix}x\\y \end{bmatrix}$

$E_{21}:\begin{bmatrix}x\\y \end{bmatrix} \mapsto \begin{bmatrix}0&0\\1&0 \end{bmatrix} \begin{bmatrix}x\\y \end{bmatrix}$

are not $A$-linear, and that the map:

$k_1E_{11} + k_2E_{22}:\begin{bmatrix}x\\y \end{bmatrix} \mapsto \begin{bmatrix}k_1&0\\0&k_2 \end{bmatrix} \begin{bmatrix}x\\y \end{bmatrix}$

is $A$-linear if and only if $k_1 = k_2$

(you don't have to check the additive property, since these are $K$-linear, you just have to check the $A$-scalar multiplication).
 

Related to Proving End($K^2$)=K for A-Module $K^2$

1. What is the definition of "Proving End($K^2$)=K for A-Module $K^2$"?

Proving End($K^2$)=K for A-Module $K^2$ is a mathematical concept that involves showing that the endomorphism ring of the A-module $K^2$ is isomorphic to the field K. In simpler terms, it means proving that all linear transformations from $K^2$ to itself can be represented by a matrix with entries from the field K.

2. Why is it important to prove End($K^2$)=K for A-Module $K^2$?

Proving End($K^2$)=K for A-Module $K^2$ is important because it provides a deeper understanding of the properties and structure of vector spaces and modules. It also has applications in various fields such as physics, engineering, and computer science.

3. What are the steps involved in proving End($K^2$)=K for A-Module $K^2$?

The steps involved in proving End($K^2$)=K for A-Module $K^2$ may vary depending on the specific approach, but generally, it involves showing that any linear transformation from $K^2$ to itself can be represented by a matrix with entries from K. This can be done by defining a basis for $K^2$ and showing that any linear transformation can be represented by a matrix with respect to this basis.

4. What are some real-life applications of End($K^2$)=K for A-Module $K^2$?

One of the main applications of proving End($K^2$)=K for A-Module $K^2$ is in quantum mechanics, where the concept of endomorphism ring is used to describe the space of operators that can act on a quantum system. It also has applications in coding theory, where linear transformations are used to encode and decode information.

5. Are there any challenges in proving End($K^2$)=K for A-Module $K^2$?

Proving End($K^2$)=K for A-Module $K^2$ can be a challenging task, as it requires a solid understanding of abstract algebra and linear algebra concepts. It also involves complex mathematical proofs and may require the use of advanced techniques such as the Jordan canonical form. Additionally, the specific approach to proving this statement may vary depending on the specific A-module and field K involved.

Similar threads

  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
856
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top