Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Regarding the definition of orders (as in subrings)

  1. Sep 21, 2011 #1
    Hi everyone! I'm new. :) Anyway there's this textbook I found regarding the definition of orders (a type of subrings). I'm kinda having trouble with the notations and the phrasings used. If anyone knows about this your help would be greatly appreciated. :)

    Anyway the definition goes like this:

    Let [itex]A[/itex] be a [itex]\mathbb{Q}[/itex]-algebra. A subring [itex]R[/itex] of [itex]A[/itex] containing its unity is called a [itex]\mathbb{Z}[/itex]-order (or simply an order) in A if R is finitely generated as a [itex]\mathbb{Z}[/itex]-module and [itex]\mathbb{Q}R=A[/itex].

    Some things I'm not quite sure of:

    1. Does [itex]\mathbb{Q}[/itex]-algebra refer to any group algebra of [itex]\mathbb{Q}[/itex]? Ie, the group algebra of [itex]\mathbb{Q}[/itex] over any group?

    2. [itex]R[/itex] is finitely generated as a [itex]\mathbb{Z}[/itex]-module = [itex]R[/itex] itself is a module over [itex]\mathbb{Z}[/itex] with a finite generating set? (Kinda confused here. @_@)

    3. I'm quite unsure about the notation [itex]\mathbb{Q}R[/itex]. Is this equal to
    [itex]\left\{q r | q \in \mathbb{Q}, r \in R\right\}[/itex]? Or a linear combination of elements from this set? The previous pages don't actually indicate anything about it. :( (Or maybe I've missed it.)

    4. Also, now that I'm at it, if I'm correct in no. 2, it means that any element in [itex]R[/itex] can be expressed as a linear combination of elements in the generating set over [itex]\mathbb{Z}[/itex]... but does the other way also hold? I mean, is it that any linear combination in the generating set over [itex]\mathbb{Z}[/itex] is also an element in [itex]R[/itex]?

    Thanks!
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 21, 2011 #2

    micromass

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor
    2016 Award

    I don't see any mention of group algebra's. So I think they just mean [itex]\mathbb{Q}[/itex]-algebra as a [itex]\mathbb{Q}[/itex]-module that is also a ring.

    Every abelian group defines a [itex]\mathbb{Z}[/itex]-module by

    [tex]nx=x+x+x+x+...+x~~~~(n~times)[/tex]

    what they mean is indeed that this group is finitely generated (which is equivalent to finitely generated as module). Thus there exists an epimorphism [itex]\mathbb{Z}[X_1,...,X_n]\rightarrow R[/itex].

    I guess it means a linear combination of such elements.

    Yes, both implications hold.
     
  4. Sep 22, 2011 #3
    Thanks for the reply! It's a little clearer to me now! :) But just one little thing...
     
  5. Sep 22, 2011 #4

    micromass

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor
    2016 Award

    No, certainly not every [itex]\mathbb{Q}[/itex]-algebra is a group algebra. For example, each [itex]\mathbb{Q}[/itex] group algebra would have no zero divisors. However, [itex]M_n(\mathbb{Q})[/itex] (the matrices) do have zero divisors if n>1.
     
  6. Sep 23, 2011 #5

    Hurkyl

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    What about (1 - [e])(1 + [e]) = 0 for any element e of order 2?
     
  7. Sep 23, 2011 #6

    micromass

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor
    2016 Award

    Hmm, I should have known better than to post that...
     
  8. Sep 24, 2011 #7
    Hmm so they're the same?

    Anyway thank you again for the replies! :)
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Regarding the definition of orders (as in subrings)
  1. Stuck on a Subring (Replies: 3)

  2. Verifying a subring? (Replies: 1)

Loading...