MHB Understanding One-Sided Ideals in Mathematics

  • Thread starter Thread starter cbarker1
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on the concept of one-sided ideals in the context of abstract algebra, specifically within the framework of commutative rings and matrix algebra as presented in "Abstract Algebra" by Dummit and Foote. The example illustrates that for a commutative ring \( R \) and an integer \( n \geq 2 \), the set \( L_j \) of \( n \times n \) matrices with arbitrary entries in the \( j \)-th column and zeroes elsewhere forms a left ideal of \( M_n(R) \) but not a right ideal. The proofs provided confirm the closure properties of \( L_j \) under matrix multiplication from the left and demonstrate the failure of this property when multiplied from the right.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of commutative rings and their properties
  • Familiarity with matrix algebra, specifically \( M_n(R) \)
  • Knowledge of the definitions of left and right ideals
  • Basic proficiency in mathematical notation and proofs
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of left and right ideals in more complex algebraic structures
  • Explore the implications of one-sided ideals in module theory
  • Learn about the structure of \( M_n(R) \) and its applications in linear algebra
  • Investigate the generalization of one-sided ideals to non-commutative rings
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of abstract algebra, and educators seeking to deepen their understanding of one-sided ideals and their applications in ring theory and matrix algebra.

cbarker1
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
345
Reaction score
23
Dear Everyone,

I am reading the Abstract Algebra Book by Dummit and Foote. I am confusing with this example for one-side ideals. So here is the example:
Let $R$ be a commutative ring with $1 \ne 0$ and let \( n\in \mathbb{Z} \) with $n\ge 2$. For each $j\in \{1,2,\dots, n\}$, let $L_j$ be the set of all $n \times n$ matrices in $M_n(R)$ with arbitrary entries in the jth column and zeroes in all other columns. It is clear that $L_j$ is closed under subtraction. It follows directly from the definition of matrix multiplication that any matrix $T \in M_n(R)$ and $A \in L_j$, the product $TA$ has zero entries in the ith column for all $i\ne j$. This shows $L_j$ is a left ideal of $M_n(R)$. Moreover, $L_j$ is not a right ideal.

What does this example look like with math symbols?

Thanks,
Cbarker1
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Cbarker1,

It's not entirely clear to me what your question is exactly. If you mean you'd like to see verification of the left ideal/non-right ideal claim, that would look something like this.

Proof $L_{j}$ is a Left Ideal
Let $A\in L_{j},$ $T\in M_{n}(R),$ and let $a_{j}$ be the $j$th column of $A$. Then $$TA = T\left[\begin{array}{c|c|c|c|c} 0 & \ldots & a_{j} & \ldots & 0 \end{array}\right] = \left[\begin{array}{c|c|c|c|c} 0 & \ldots & Ta_{j} & \ldots & 0 \end{array}\right],$$ which shows that $TA\in L_{j}$. Hence, $L_{j}$ is a left ideal over $M_{n}(R).$

Proof $L_{1}$ is not a Right Ideal
Let $a_{1} = \begin{bmatrix}1\\ 0\\ \vdots\\ 0 \end{bmatrix},$ $A = \left[\begin{array}{c|c|c|c} a_{1} & 0 &\ldots & 0 \end{array} \right],$ and $T = \left[\begin{array}{c|c|c|c|c} a_{1} & a_{1} & 0 &\ldots & 0 \end{array} \right].$ Then $AT = T\notin L_{1}.$ Hence, $L_{1}$ is not a right ideal over $M_{n}(R).$ This example can be generalized to any $j$, if desired.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I am trying to see the symbols. Like this: \[ \begin{pmatrix} 1 & 2 & 3\\ a & b & c \end{pmatrix} \].
 
I am trying to see the symbols. Something Like this: \[ \begin{pmatrix} 1 & 2 & 3\\ a & b & c \end{pmatrix} \].
 
OK, let's see if this helps.

A matrix in $L_{j}$ would look be written as $$A = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & \ldots & a_{1j} & \ldots & 0\\ 0 & \ldots & a_{2j} & \ldots & 0\\ \vdots & \ddots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots\\ 0 & \ldots & a_{nj} & \ldots & 0\end{bmatrix},$$ and a matrix $T\in M_{n}(R)$ would have the form $$T = \begin{bmatrix} t_{11} & \ldots & t_{1j} & \ldots & t_{1n}\\ t_{21} & \ldots & t_{2j} & \ldots & t_{2n}\\ \vdots & \ddots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots\\ t_{n1} & \ldots & t_{nj} & \ldots & t_{nn}\\\end{bmatrix},$$ where all the $a$'s and $t$'s are elements of $R$. Using these forms for $A$ and $T$, the product $TA$ would be $$TA = \begin{bmatrix}0 & \ldots & t_{11}a_{1j} + t_{12}a_{2j}+ \ldots + t_{1n}a_{nj} & \ldots & 0\\ 0 & \ldots & \vdots & \ldots & 0\\ \vdots & \ddots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots\\ 0 & \ldots & \ldots & \ldots & 0 \end{bmatrix},$$ where I have left rows $2$ through $n$ of the $j$th column of $TA$ for you to try to fill in for yourself.

Does this answer your question?
 
yes.
 
I am studying the mathematical formalism behind non-commutative geometry approach to quantum gravity. I was reading about Hopf algebras and their Drinfeld twist with a specific example of the Moyal-Weyl twist defined as F=exp(-iλ/2θ^(μν)∂_μ⊗∂_ν) where λ is a constant parametar and θ antisymmetric constant tensor. {∂_μ} is the basis of the tangent vector space over the underlying spacetime Now, from my understanding the enveloping algebra which appears in the definition of the Hopf algebra...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K