Understanding Algebras: The Relationship Between Rings and Modules

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Artusartos
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Algebra Definition
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion clarifies the definition of an R-algebra, specifically that an R-module M can also function as a ring without necessitating commutativity. The key property discussed is the compatibility of ring and module operations, expressed as r(xy) = (rx)y = x(ry) for all x, y in M and r in R. Participants emphasized that this compatibility does not imply commutativity of the elements in M, as the operations are independent of the order of multiplication for x and y.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of commutative rings
  • Familiarity with R-modules
  • Knowledge of ring theory
  • Basic concepts of algebraic structures
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of R-modules in detail
  • Explore examples of non-commutative rings
  • Learn about the implications of associativity and distributivity in algebra
  • Investigate the relationship between rings and modules in advanced algebra
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, algebra students, and educators seeking a deeper understanding of the relationship between rings and modules, particularly in the context of algebraic structures.

Artusartos
Messages
236
Reaction score
0
"Let R be a commutative ring. We say that M is an algebra over R, or that M is an R-algebra if M is an R-module that is also a ring (not necessarily commutative), and the ring and module operations are compatible, i.e., r(xy) = (rx)y = x(ry) for all x, y \in M and r \in R."

I'm not really sure why the second equality is true, because it implies commutativity and the definition tells us that an R-module is not necessarily commutative, right?

Thank you in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, it does NOT imply commutativity because x and y are not commuted. What is says is that it doesn't matter if you multiply the real number "r" by x or by y before you multiply the two module members.
 
HallsofIvy said:
No, it does NOT imply commutativity because x and y are not commuted. What is says is that it doesn't matter if you multiply the real number "r" by x or by y before you multiply the two module members.

Thanks, but I cannot see any ring/module operation that would permit that. We know that associativity and distributivity hold (and of course others too, but they aren't related to this case). But I can't see how these basic operations would imply what you said.
 
The definition does that ##rx = xr##, but that's for ##r\in R## and ##x\in M##. The definition does not state that ##xy = yx## for ##x,y\in M##. So ##M## is not commutative in that sense.
 
micromass said:
The definition does that ##rx = xr##, but that's for ##r\in R## and ##x\in M##. The definition does not state that ##xy = yx## for ##x,y\in M##. So ##M## is not commutative in that sense.

Thanks a lot.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K