DOCSLIB.ORG

A Survey of Division Rings and Simple

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Survey of Division Rings and Simple CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE NONCOMMUTATIVE RINGS: A SURVEY OF DIVISION RINGS AND SIMPLE RINGS A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements For the degree of Master of Science in Mathematics by Sharon Paesachov December 2012 The thesis of Sharon Paesachov is approved: |||||||||||||||||| |||||||| Dr. Katherine Stevenson Date |||||||||||||||||| |||||||| Dr. Mary Rosen Date |||||||||||||||||| |||||||| Dr. Jerry Rosen, Chair Date California State University, Northridge ii Dedications To my Mom, Kazia and Turunj, and Eran Thanks for all your support iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to take this time to thank all those who have made this work possible. First, to the Chair of my thesis committee, Jerry Rosen, for providing support and guidance. I appreciate all the time spent explaining, and sometimes re-explaining. Second, Mary Rosen, for all your proof reading and editing. Many thanks Katherine Stevenson for serving on my committee. I also want to thank all the students who have struggled with me. You are all like family to me. Without you I just don't know how I would have made it. Thanks Mike Hubbard, Alex Sherbetjian, Shant Mahserejian, Greg Cossel, Spencer Gerhardt, and to a couple who have moved on, Jessie Benavides and Chad Griffith. Finally to my family. I want to thank my mother for all her love and support. I would have never gone back to school without your encouragement. To Kazia, thank you for putting up with all the late, late nights and all the ups and downs, I'm sure it wasn't easy. iv Table of Contents Signature Page . ii Dedications . iii Acknowledgments . iv Abstract . vii Introduction . .1 Chapter 1 Classical Results in Noncommutative Ring Theory . .3 1.1 Modules . .3 1.2 Jacobson Radical . .7 1.3 Artinian Rings . 13 1.4 Semisimple Artinian rings . 20 1.5 Wedderburn-Artin . 25 Chapter 2 Division Rings . 31 2.1 Power series and Laurent series . 31 2.2 Ring of Fractions and the Ore Domain . 37 2.3 Noetherian Rings . 42 2.4 Skew Polynomial Rings . 46 2.5 Generic Ring of Matrices . 52 2.6 Goldie Rings . 55 Chapter 3 Simple Rings . 62 2.1 Construction of Simple Rings . 62 2.2 Central Localization . 68 2.3 Examples of Simple Rings . 71 v Bibliography . 81 vi Abstract NONCOMMUTATIVE RINGS: A SURVEY OF DIVISION RINGS AND SIMPLE RINGS by Sharon Paesachov Master of Science in Mathematics In this thesis we start with some important classical results in noncommutative ring theory. Namely, we classify all semisimple Artinian rings in terms of matrices with entries from division rings. In the second chapter we start with some natural constructions of division rings. We do this by taking a polynomial ring and "skewing" the multiplication. Further in the chapter we show what conditions a ring must meet in order to have (or be imbedded in) a division ring of fractions. The remainder of the second chapter is devoted to more constructions of division rings. In the final chapter we move our focus to Simple rings. We give a construction of simple rings as well as many examples. vii INTRODUCTION The primary goal of this thesis is to give methods for constructing two classes of noncommutative rings called division rings and simple rings. A division ring is a ring in which every non-zero element has a multiplicative inverse. The key thing is to note that multiplication need not be commutative. The first example of a (noncommutative) division ring was discovered in 1843 by the English mathematician Sir William Hamilton. Hamilton was searching for a way to represent vecotrs in space in an analogous manner to how vectors in the plane are represented by complex numbers. It turns out such a construction is impossible, but in his failed attempt, Hamilton discovered the Quarternions. Hamilton's discovery turned out to be a division ring as well as a four dimensional vector space over the real numbers. The next example of a division ring was found in 1903 by Hilbert. Hilbert started with the field of Laurent series F ((x)), over the field F = R(t) (the rational function field over the real numbers. He then \skewed" the multiplication via the automorphism which maps t to 2t. That is, the indeterminate x no longer commutes with the coefficients. Instead, we define xt = 2tx. The resulting ring is denoted F ((s; σ)), where σ(t) = 2t. Hilbert showed that F ((s; σ)) is a division ring, called the division ring of skew Laurent series. One interesting facet of Hilbert's division ring is that it is infinite dimensional over its center. In the 1920s and 30s ring theorists developed structure theories for large classes of noncommutative rings. It was discovered that, in some sense, division rings provide the underpinnings for many important classes of noncommutative rings and various division ring constructions were discovered. Some of these constructions are not 1 easily accessible to most people studying advanced math. However, skew Laurent construction only requires a field and an automorphism. We will review the skew Laurent series construction and we will determine the center in all cases (i.e. where the automorphism has finite and infinite periods). We then show how these constructions can be generalized to the case where the coefficient ring is simple (a ring R is simple if its only two-sided ideals are (0) and R). That is, if R is simple and σ is an automorphism of R, then we prove that the skew Laurent series ring R((x; σ)) is simple and we determine its center in all cases. We also show how certain classes on noncommutative domains (Ore domains) have division rings of fractions and use this to give alternative methods for constructing division rings. Finally, we construct simple rings by \skewing" the multiplication via a derivation, instead of an automorphism. We begin the thesis by reviewing some basic noncommutative ring theory so that the reader will get an idea how division rings and simple rings figure into the basic structure theory of noncommutative rings. 2 Chapter 1: Classical Results in Noncommutative Ring Theory We begin our discussion with some classical results in Noncommutative Ring Theory. We start with modules and these lead to our first example of a division ring. Next, our discussion takes us into the exploration of the Jacobson radical of a ring. We will try to find rings that have a \nice" Jacobson radical and, this will allow us to define a semisimple ring and from there to go further and define a simple ring. All of this serves two purposes: to prove the classical theorems of Wedderburn and Artin which state that every simple Artinian ring is isomorphic to a matrix ring over a division ring and that every semisimple Artinian ring is isomorphic to a finite direct product of matrix rings over division rings. These theorems indicate the signficant role played by division rings. Section 1: Modules Definition 1.a: An R-module is a vector space over a ring R. Definition 1.b: Alternatively, we say that the additive abelian group M is said to be an R-module if there exists a mapping M × R −! M defined by (m; r) 7! mr (m 2 M; r 2 R) such that: (1) m(a + b) = ma + mb (2) (m + n)a = ma + na (3) (ma)b = m(ab) for all m; n 2 M and all a; b 2 R. We remark that we are omitting the module axiom which states that m1 = m for all 3 m 2 M where 1 is the unity of R. In this chapter, we are not assuming that our rings contain a unity. In fact, the goal of several of our results is to conlude certain classes of rings do caontain a unity. Since it will be necessary to check that certain objects are submodules, we give the Submodule Criterion as the definition for what a submodule is. Definition 2: Let R be a ring and M an R-module. A subset N of M is a submodule of M if (1) N 6= ; (2) x + yr 2 N for all r 2 R and all x; y 2 N. Definition 3: An R-module M is said to be faithful if Mr = (0) implies r = 0 Definition 4: If M is an R-module, then the set A(M) = fx 2 R : Mx = (0)g. With respect to the definition of faithful, we can now say that M is faithful if A(M) = (0) Lemma 5: A(M) is a two-sided ideal of R. Moreover, M is a faithful R=A(M)-module. Proof: A(M) is clearly an additive subgroup of R. Let r 2 R and x 2 A(M). Now Mxr = (0)r = (0) ) xr 2 A(M). Thus A(M) is a right ideal. To see that A(M) is a left ideal, notice that M(rx) = (Mr)x ⊂ Mx = (0) ) rx 2 A(M). Hence, A(M) is a two-sided ideal of R. To see that M is an R=A(M)-module, let m 2 M; r + A(M) 2 R=A(M). We define the action m(r + A(M)) = mr. To show this is well-defined: 4 r + A(M) = r0 + A(M) ) r − r0 2 A(M) ) m(r − r0) = 0 for all m 2 M ) mr = mr0: Thus 0 0 m(r + A(M)) = mr = mr = m(r + A(M)). Now let m 2 M; r1; r2 2 R, then m(r1 + A(M) + r2 + A(M)) = m(r1 + r2 + A(M)) = m(r1 + r2) = mr1 + mr2 = m(r1 + A(M)) + m(r2 + A(M)): The second and third axioms for modules follow just as easily.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Quaternion Algebras and Modular Forms
    QUATERNION ALGEBRAS AND MODULAR FORMS JIM STANKEWICZ We wish to know about generalizations of modular forms using quater- nion algebras. We begin with preliminaries as follows. 1. A few preliminaries on quaternion algebras As we must to make a correct statement in full generality, we begin with a profoundly unhelpful definition. Definition 1. A quaternion algebra over a field k is a 4 dimensional vector space over k with a multiplication action which turns it into a central simple algebra Four dimensional vector spaces should be somewhat familiar, but what of the rest? Let's start with the basics. Definition 2. An algebra B over a ring R is an R-module with an associative multiplication law(hence a ring). The most commonly used examples of such rings in arithmetic geom- etry are affine polynomial rings R[x1; : : : ; xn]=I where R is a commu- tative ring and I an ideal. We can have many more examples though. Example 1. If R is a ring (possibly non-commutative), n 2 Z≥1 then the ring of n by n matrices over R(henceforth, Mn(R)) form an R- algebra. Definition 3. A simple ring is a ring whose only 2-sided ideals are itself and (0) Equivalently, a ring B is simple if for any ring R and any nonzero ring homomorphism φ : B ! R is injective. We show here that if R = k and B = Mn(k) then B is simple. Suppose I is a 2-sided ideal of B. In particular, it is a right ideal, so BI = I.
    [Show full text]
  • Noncommutative Localization in Algebra and Topology
    Noncommutative localization in algebra and topology ICMS Edinburgh 2002 Edited by Andrew Ranicki Electronic version of London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series 330 Cambridge University Press (2006) Contents Dedication . vii Preface . ix Historical Perspective . x Conference Participants . xi Conference Photo . .xii Conference Timetable . xiii On atness and the Ore condition J. A. Beachy ......................................................1 Localization in general rings, a historical survey P. M. Cohn .......................................................5 Noncommutative localization in homotopy theory W. G. Dwyer . 24 Noncommutative localization in group rings P. A. Linnell . 40 A non-commutative generalisation of Thomason's localisation theorem A. Neeman . 60 Noncommutative localization in topology A. A. Ranicki . 81 v L2-Betti numbers, Isomorphism Conjectures and Noncommutative Lo- calization H. Reich . 103 Invariants of boundary link cobordism II. The Blanch¯eld-Duval form D. Sheiham . 143 Noncommutative localization in noncommutative geometry Z. Skoda· ........................................................220 vi Dedicated to the memory of Desmond Sheiham (13th November 1974 ¡ 25th March 2005) ² Cambridge University (Trinity College), 1993{1997 B.A. Hons. Mathematics 1st Class, 1996 Part III Mathematics, Passed with Distinction, 1997 ² University of Edinburgh, 1997{2001 Ph.D. Invariants of Boundary Link Cobordism, 2001 ² Visiting Assistant Professor, Mathematics Department, University of California at Riverside, 2001{2003 ² Research Instructor, International University Bremen (IUB), 2003{2005 vii Publications: 1. Non-commutative Characteristic Polynomials and Cohn Localization Journal of the London Mathematical Society (2) Vol. 64, 13{28 (2001) http://arXiv.org/abs/math.RA/0104158 2. Invariants of Boundary Link Cobordism Memoirs of the American Mathematical Society, Vol. 165 (2003) http://arXiv.org/abs/math.AT/0110249 3. Whitehead Groups of Localizations and the Endomorphism Class Group Journal of Algebra, Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Ring (Mathematics) 1 Ring (Mathematics)
    Ring (mathematics) 1 Ring (mathematics) In mathematics, a ring is an algebraic structure consisting of a set together with two binary operations usually called addition and multiplication, where the set is an abelian group under addition (called the additive group of the ring) and a monoid under multiplication such that multiplication distributes over addition.a[›] In other words the ring axioms require that addition is commutative, addition and multiplication are associative, multiplication distributes over addition, each element in the set has an additive inverse, and there exists an additive identity. One of the most common examples of a ring is the set of integers endowed with its natural operations of addition and multiplication. Certain variations of the definition of a ring are sometimes employed, and these are outlined later in the article. Polynomials, represented here by curves, form a ring under addition The branch of mathematics that studies rings is known and multiplication. as ring theory. Ring theorists study properties common to both familiar mathematical structures such as integers and polynomials, and to the many less well-known mathematical structures that also satisfy the axioms of ring theory. The ubiquity of rings makes them a central organizing principle of contemporary mathematics.[1] Ring theory may be used to understand fundamental physical laws, such as those underlying special relativity and symmetry phenomena in molecular chemistry. The concept of a ring first arose from attempts to prove Fermat's last theorem, starting with Richard Dedekind in the 1880s. After contributions from other fields, mainly number theory, the ring notion was generalized and firmly established during the 1920s by Emmy Noether and Wolfgang Krull.[2] Modern ring theory—a very active mathematical discipline—studies rings in their own right.
    [Show full text]
  • Noncommutative Localization in Noncommutative Geometry
    Noncommutative localization in noncommutative geometry Zoran Skodaˇ Abstract The aim of these notes is to collect and motivate the basic localiza- tion toolbox for the geometric study of “spaces” locally described by noncommutative rings and their categories of modules. We present the basics of Ore localization of rings and modules in great detail. Common practical techniques are studied as well. We also describe a counterexample to a folklore test principle for Ore sets. Localization in negatively filtered rings arising in deformation theory is presented. A new notion of the differential Ore condition is introduced in the study of localization of differential calculi. To aid the geometrical viewpoint, localization is studied with em- phasis on descent formalism, flatness, abelian categories of quasicoher- ent sheaves and generalizations, and natural pairs of adjoint functors for sheaf and module categories. The key motivational theorems from the seminal works of Gabriel on localization, abelian categories and schemes are quoted without proof, as well as the related statements of Popescu, Eilenberg-Watts, Deligne and Rosenberg. The Cohn universal localization does not have good flatness prop- erties, but it is determined by the localization map already at the ring level, like the perfect localizations are. Cohn localization is here related to the quasideterminants of Gelfand and Retakh; and this may help arXiv:math/0403276v2 [math.QA] 1 Mar 2005 the understanding of both subjects. Contents 1 Introduction 2 2 Noncommutative geometry 6 3 Abstract localization 12 1 2 Noncommutative localization in noncommutative geometry 4 Ore localization for monoids 15 5 Ore localization for rings 22 6 Practical criteria for Ore sets 25 7 Ore localization for modules 30 8 Monads, comonads and gluing 33 9 Distributive laws and compatibility 40 10 Commutative localization 45 11 Ring maps vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Lectures on Non-Commutative Rings
    Lectures on Non-Commutative Rings by Frank W. Anderson Mathematics 681 University of Oregon Fall, 2002 This material is free. However, we retain the copyright. You may not charge to redistribute this material, in whole or part, without written permission from the author. Preface. This document is a somewhat extended record of the material covered in the Fall 2002 seminar Math 681 on non-commutative ring theory. This does not include material from the informal discussion of the representation theory of algebras that we had during the last couple of lectures. On the other hand this does include expanded versions of some items that were not covered explicitly in the lectures. The latter mostly deals with material that is prerequisite for the later topics and may very well have been covered in earlier courses. For the most part this is simply a cleaned up version of the notes that were prepared for the class during the term. In this we have attempted to correct all of the many mathematical errors, typos, and sloppy writing that we could nd or that have been pointed out to us. Experience has convinced us, though, that we have almost certainly not come close to catching all of the goofs. So we welcome any feedback from the readers on how this can be cleaned up even more. One aspect of these notes that you should understand is that a lot of the substantive material, particularly some of the technical stu, will be presented as exercises. Thus, to get the most from this you should probably read the statements of the exercises and at least think through what they are trying to address.
    [Show full text]
  • RING THEORY 1. Ring Theory a Ring Is a Set a with Two Binary Operations
    CHAPTER IV RING THEORY 1. Ring Theory A ring is a set A with two binary operations satisfying the rules given below. Usually one binary operation is denoted `+' and called \addition," and the other is denoted by juxtaposition and is called \multiplication." The rules required of these operations are: 1) A is an abelian group under the operation + (identity denoted 0 and inverse of x denoted x); 2) A is a monoid under the operation of multiplication (i.e., multiplication is associative and there− is a two-sided identity usually denoted 1); 3) the distributive laws (x + y)z = xy + xz x(y + z)=xy + xz hold for all x, y,andz A. Sometimes one does∈ not require that a ring have a multiplicative identity. The word ring may also be used for a system satisfying just conditions (1) and (3) (i.e., where the associative law for multiplication may fail and for which there is no multiplicative identity.) Lie rings are examples of non-associative rings without identities. Almost all interesting associative rings do have identities. If 1 = 0, then the ring consists of one element 0; otherwise 1 = 0. In many theorems, it is necessary to specify that rings under consideration are not trivial, i.e. that 1 6= 0, but often that hypothesis will not be stated explicitly. 6 If the multiplicative operation is commutative, we call the ring commutative. Commutative Algebra is the study of commutative rings and related structures. It is closely related to algebraic number theory and algebraic geometry. If A is a ring, an element x A is called a unit if it has a two-sided inverse y, i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • A Generalization of the Field of Fractions of an Integral Domain
    MICIIAUI), ROBERT EUGENE. A Generalization oi the Field of Fractions of an Integral Domain. (1970) Directed by: Dr. E. E. Posey pp. 21 I ii this paper the author deals with < he problem of construct- ing the field of fractions of an integral domain and a general i'. of one of the methods of construction used to construct a ring oi left quotients for an arbitrary ring. In this generalization thi author relies heavily upon the concept of a faithful complete Eilter and defines partial endomorphisms from the filter el erne into the ring. After partitioning these partial endomorphisms Lnti equivalence classes and after defining operations on the equlvalei classes the author then shows that the resultant structure Is I ring of left quotients. In addition to showing that a faithful complete filter assures the existence of a ring of left quotients the author shows that these rings of left quotients can be embedded in the Utumi ring oJ left quotients. The paper concludes with theorems showing necessary and Hiifflclfiil conditions for the classical ring oi left quotient! ,., fin}! i; to exist .in.l .i theorem establishing the uniqueness up to Isomorphism of the classical ring of left quotients oi a ri R. A GENERALIZATION OF THE FIELD OF FRACTIONS OF AN INTEGRAL DOMAIN by Robert Eugene Michaud A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School at The University of North Carolina at Greensboro in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts Greensboro August, 1970 Approved by APPROVAL SHEET This thesis has been approved by the following committee of the Faculty of the Graduate School at The University of North Carolina at Greensboro.
    [Show full text]
  • Determination of the Differentiably Simple Rings with a Minimal Ideal Author(S): Richard E
    Annals of Mathematics Determination of the Differentiably Simple Rings with a Minimal Ideal Author(s): Richard E. Block Source: The Annals of Mathematics, Second Series, Vol. 90, No. 3 (Nov., 1969), pp. 433-459 Published by: Annals of Mathematics Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1970745 Accessed: 07/11/2010 19:03 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=annals. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Annals of Mathematics is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Annals of Mathematics. http://www.jstor.org Determinationof the differentiablysimple ringswith a minimalideal* By RICHARD E.
    [Show full text]
  • Do Simple Rings Have Unity Elements?
    JOURNAL OF ALGEBRA 7, 140-143 (1967) Do Simple Rings Have Unity Elements? J. C. ROBSON Department of Mathematics, The University, Leeds, England Communicated by A. W. Goldie Received October 20, 1966 1. It is well known that a simple artinian ring has a unity element, and that a commutative simple ring, being a field, has a unity element. However, it can easily be seenthat not every simple ring hasa unity element, this being shown in the first proposition of this note. Nevertheless, it could be asked whether a simple right noetherian ring necessarilyhas a unity element and the answer (which comprisesthe main result of this note) is a qualified “yes”. 2. There are simple integral domains which are not division rings-see, for example, [2]. Thus the following result demonstrates that there exist simple integral domains without unity elements. PROPOSITION. Let R be a simple integral domain which is not a division ring and let I be a proper nonzero right ideal of R. Then IR is a simpleintegral domain without a unity element. Proof. Let T be a nonzero ideal of IR. Then IR = I(RTIR) = (IR) T(IR) C T, and so T = IR and IR is a simple integral domain. Say IR has a unity element e. Then e is an idempotent. Thus ear = er for all r E R, and hence er = r since R is an integral domain. Therefore R=eRCIR*R=IRCI, which contradicts the assumptionthat I was a proper right ideal of R. So IR does not have a unity element. 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Aspects of Semirings
    Appendix A Some Aspects of Semirings Semirings considered as a common generalization of associative rings and dis- tributive lattices provide important tools in different branches of computer science. Hence structural results on semirings are interesting and are a basic concept. Semi- rings appear in different mathematical areas, such as ideals of a ring, as positive cones of partially ordered rings and fields, vector bundles, in the context of topolog- ical considerations and in the foundation of arithmetic etc. In this appendix some algebraic concepts are introduced in order to generalize the corresponding concepts of semirings N of non-negative integers and their algebraic theory is discussed. A.1 Introductory Concepts H.S. Vandiver gave the first formal definition of a semiring and developed the the- ory of a special class of semirings in 1934. A semiring S is defined as an algebra (S, +, ·) such that (S, +) and (S, ·) are semigroups connected by a(b+c) = ab+ac and (b+c)a = ba+ca for all a,b,c ∈ S.ThesetN of all non-negative integers with usual addition and multiplication of integers is an example of a semiring, called the semiring of non-negative integers. A semiring S may have an additive zero ◦ defined by ◦+a = a +◦=a for all a ∈ S or a multiplicative zero 0 defined by 0a = a0 = 0 for all a ∈ S. S may contain both ◦ and 0 but they may not coincide. Consider the semiring (N, +, ·), where N is the set of all non-negative integers; a + b ={lcm of a and b, when a = 0,b= 0}; = 0, otherwise; and a · b = usual product of a and b.
    [Show full text]
  • INJECTIVE MODULES OVER a PRTNCIPAL LEFT and RIGHT IDEAL DOMAIN, \Ryith APPLICATIONS
    INJECTIVE MODULES OVER A PRTNCIPAL LEFT AND RIGHT IDEAL DOMAIN, \ryITH APPLICATIONS By Alina N. Duca SUBMITTED IN PARTTAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR TI{E DEGREE OF DOCTOR OFPHILOSOPHY AT UMVERSITY OF MAMTOBA WINNIPEG, MANITOBA April 3,2007 @ Copyright by Alina N. Duca, 2007 THE T.TNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA FACULTY OF GRADUATE STI]DIES ***** COPYRIGHT PERMISSION INJECTIVE MODULES OVER A PRINCIPAL LEFT AND RIGHT IDEAL DOMAIN, WITH APPLICATIONS BY Alina N. Duca A Thesis/Practicum submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies of The University of Manitoba in partial fulfïllment of the requirement of the degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Alina N. Duca @ 2007 Permission has been granted to the Library of the University of Manitoba to lend or sell copies of this thesidpracticum, to the National Library of Canada to microfilm this thesis and to lend or sell copies of the film, and to University MicrofïIms Inc. to pubtish an abstract of this thesiVpracticum. This reproduction or copy of this thesis has been made available by authority of the copyright owner solely for the purpose of private study and research, and may only be reproduced and copied as permitted by copyright laws or with express written authorization from the copyright owner. UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA DEPARTMENT OF MATIIEMATICS The undersigned hereby certify that they have read and recommend to the Faculty of Graduate Studies for acceptance a thesis entitled "Injective Modules over a Principal Left and Right ldeal Domain, with Applications" by Alina N. Duca in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Dated: April3.2007 External Examiner: K.R.Goodearl Research Supervisor: T.G.Kucera Examining Committee: G.Krause Examining Committee: W.Kocay T]NTVERSITY OF MANITOBA Date: April3,2007 Author: Alina N.
    [Show full text]
  • Azumaya Algebras
    Azumaya Algebras Dennis Presotto November 4, 2015 1 Introduction: Central Simple Algebras Azumaya algebras are introduced as generalized or global versions of central simple algebras. So the first part of this seminar will be about central simple algebras. Definition 1.1. A ring R is called simple if 0 and R are the only two-sided ideals. Simple rings are only interesting if they are noncommutative because we have the following: Proposition 1.2. If R is a commutative, simple ring. Then R is a field. Proof. Take x a nonzero element in R, then Rx is a nonzero twosided ideal and hence is equal to R. In particular 1 2 Rx and thus x is invertible. Definition 1.3. Let k be a field and A a finite dimensional associative k-algebra. Then A is called a central simple algebra (CSA) over k if A is a simple ring and Z(A) = k Note that the inclusion of k in the center of A is automatic as A is a k algebra. Example 1.4. Let n be some natural number, then the matrix ring Mn(k) is a CSA over k. It obviously has dimension n2 over k so we only need to check that it is central and simple. To see this, let eij denote the matrix with a 1 at position (i; j) and zeroes at all other positions, i.e. 20 0 ··· 03 6 .. 7 60 . 7 6 7 6 . 7 eij = 6 . 1 7 6 7 6 .. 7 4 . 5 0 0 Then for a matrix eiiM = Meii for all i implies that M is diagonal and eijM = Meij for all i and j implies that all entries on the diagonal must be the same.
    [Show full text]