MHB What is the Intuition Behind Integral Over in Commutative Algebra?

A.Magnus
Messages
138
Reaction score
0
Could somebody write me the intuition behind the concept of "Integral Over"? Please do not write me its formal definition, I can easily get it from textbook. What I am also looking for is its motivation behind it. Please give me also examples.

For your convenience, the formal definition according to Wikipedia goes like this:

In commutative algebra, an element $b$ of a commutative ring $B$ is said to be integral over $A$, a subring of $B$, if there are $n ≥ 1$ and $a_{j}\ in A$ such that

$$b^{n}+a_{n-1}b^{n-1}+\cdots +a_{1}b+a_{0}=0.$$

That is to say, $b$ is a root of a monic polynomial over $A$. If every element of $B$ is integral over $A$, then it is said that $B$ is integral over $A$, or equivalently $B$ is an integral extension of $A$.​

I understand that plain simple English definition runs the risk of imprecision; I will take it as working definition only to be improved as I progress along. Thank you for your times and gracious helping hand.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The motivating example comes from the ring of real numbers. You probably know that every real number is either algebraic (like $\sqrt2$) or transcendental (like $\pi$). The algebraic numbers are those that satisfy a polynomial equation with rational coefficients. So they are exactly the real numbers that are integral over $\Bbb Q$. The set $\Bbb A$ of all algebraic numbers is a ring (in fact, a field – see here), and the ring $\Bbb A$ is an integral extension of $\Bbb Q$.
 
Opalg said:
The motivating example comes from the ring of real numbers. You probably know that every real number is either algebraic (like $\sqrt2$) or transcendental (like $\pi$). The algebraic numbers are those that satisfy a polynomial equation with rational coefficients. So they are exactly the real numbers that are integral over $\Bbb Q$. The set $\Bbb A$ of all algebraic numbers is a ring (in fact, a field – see here), and the ring $\Bbb A$ is an integral extension of $\Bbb Q$.

Thank you for your gracious helping hand, apologize for getting back to you late. ~MA
 
##\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...
When decomposing a representation ##\rho## of a finite group ##G## into irreducible representations, we can find the number of times the representation contains a particular irrep ##\rho_0## through the character inner product $$ \langle \chi, \chi_0\rangle = \frac{1}{|G|} \sum_{g\in G} \chi(g) \chi_0(g)^*$$ where ##\chi## and ##\chi_0## are the characters of ##\rho## and ##\rho_0##, respectively. Since all group elements in the same conjugacy class have the same characters, this may be...
Back
Top