DOCSLIB.ORG

Arxiv:2011.11702V4 [Math.RA] 16 Jun 2021 Position: Nessae Tews.W Fe Eoemultiplication Denote Often We Otherwise

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Arxiv:2011.11702V4 [Math.RA] 16 Jun 2021 Position: Nessae Tews.W Fe Eoemultiplication Denote Often We Otherwise FLEXIBLE IDEMPOTENTS IN NONASSOCIATIVE ALGEBRAS LOUIS ROWEN YOAV SEGEV Abstract. “Fusion rules” are laws of multiplication among eigenspaces of an idempotent. We establish fusion rules for flexible idempotents, following Albert in the power-associative case. We define the notion of an axis in the noncommutative setting and accumulate information about pairs of axes. 1. Introduction Throughout this paper A is an algebra (not necessarily associative, not necessarily with a multiplicative unit element 1) over a field F with char(F ) 6= 2 unless stated otherwise. We often denote multiplication x·y in A by juxta- position: xy. A(◦) is the algebra with the same vector space structure as A, 1 but where multiplication is defined by x ◦ y = 2 (xy + yx). Throughout we denote C(A)= {x ∈ A | xy = yx, for all y ∈ A}. Definitions 1.1. (1) The algebra A is flexible if it satisfies the identity (xy)x = x(yx). (2) A is power-associative if F [x] is associative (and therefore com- mutative) for each x ∈ A. Commutative algebras are flexible, since (1.1) (xy)x = (yx)x = x(yx). arXiv:2011.11702v4 [math.RA] 16 Jun 2021 In a flexible algebra we write xyx without parentheses, since there is no ambiguity. Linearizing the flexible axiom yields (1.2) (xy)z + (zy)x = x(yz)+ z(yx). We study eigenvalues of idempotents a ∈ A, in the spirit of [A]. We often assume that A is flexible, our objective being to generalize the well-known commutative theory. Date: June 17, 2021. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary: 17A05, 17A15, 17A20 ; Secondary: 17A36, 17C27. Key words and phrases. axis, flexible algebra, power-associative, fusion, idempotent, noncommutative Jordan. ∗ The first author was supported by the Israel Science Foundation grant 1623/16. 1 2 LOUIS ROWEN, YOAV SEGEV In §2 we also often assume that A is power-associative, relying heavily on Albert [A]. (i) Following Albert’s terminology, we define the left and right multipli- cation maps La(b) := a · b and Ra(b) := b · a. (ii) We write Aλ(Xa) for the eigenspace of λ with respect to the trans- formation Xa, X ∈ {L, R}, i.e., Aλ(La)= {v ∈ A : a · v = λv}, and similarly for Aλ(Ra). Often we just write Aλ for Aλ(La), when a is understood. (iii) We denote: Aλ,δ(a) := Aλ(La) ∩ Aδ(Ra). An element in Aλ,δ(a) will be called a (λ, δ)-eigenvector of a, and (λ, δ) will be called its eigenvalue. We just write Aλ,δ when the idempotent a is understood. Thus Aλ,λ = {v ∈ A : a · v = λv = v · a}, cf. [HSS, §1.1, p. 263], and a ∈ A1,1. Of course Aλ,λ = Aλ when A is commutative. Lemma 2.3 gives identities in the operators La,Ra : A → A. We study idempotents in terms of the following notions. Definitions 1.2. (1) Idempotents a, b ∈ A are orthogonal if ab = ba = 0. (2) An idempotent a ∈ A is primitive if it cannot be written as the sum of nontrivial orthogonal idempotents. (3) An idempotent a ∈ A is left (resp. right) absolutely primitive if A1(La) = F a (resp. A1(Ra) = F a). The idempotent a is absolutely primitive if it is both left and right absolutely primitive. (Sometimes this is called “primitive” in the literature.) (4) An idempotent a ∈ A is flexible if LaRa = RaLa, and (xa)x = x(ax) for all x ∈ A. Lemma A (Lemmas 2.1 and 2.3). Suppose a ∈ A is a given flexible idem- potent. 2 2 (i) Ra − Ra = La − La. (ii) Ra(Ra + La − 1) = La(Ra + La − 1). (iii) If A is power-associative over a field of characteristic 6= 2, 3, then (Xa − 1)Ya(La + Ra − 1) = 0, for X,Y ∈ {R,L}. Next, write ˚ A1/2(a)= {x ∈ A | ax + xa = x}. ˚ (We write A1/2, when a is understood.) Albert proved for A power-associative with char(F ) 6= 2, 3 that ˚ A = A1,1 ⊕ A0,0 ⊕ A1/2. This is reproved directly as Theorem 2.10(i). The following theorem of Albert then describes the appropriate fusion laws in the algebra A : FLEXIBLE IDEMPOTENTS IN NONASSOCIATIVE ALGEBRAS 3 Albert’s Fusion Theorem ([A, Theorem 3, p. 560, Theorem 5, p. 562]). Suppose that A is power-associative with char(F ) 6= 2, 3. Let a ∈ A be an idempotent. (i) A0,0, A1,1 are subalgebras. Furthermore for A flexible, ˚ ˚ ˚ ˚ (ii) Aλ,λA1/2 ⊆ A1−λ,1−λ + A1/2, A1/2Aλ,λ ⊆ A1−λ,1−λ + A1/2, for λ = 0, 1. ˚ ˚ ˚ (iii) aA1/2, A1/2a ⊆ A1/2. Proposition 3.4 provides a useful decomposition result into eigenspaces. In §3 we drop power-associativity, and turn to a noncommutative version of axes, in preparation for the study of flexible axial algebras in [RS2]. The simplest nontrivial situation is for A1(La)= F a and for La to have exactly one eigenvalue ∈/ {0, 1}. (When the algebra A is not power-associative, the 1 third eigenvalue need not be 2 . This makes [T] quite surprising, giving a 1 condition for 2 to be an eigenvalue of an element of A after all.) Accordingly, we have: Definition 1.3. Let a ∈ A be an idempotent, and λ, δ∈ / {0, 1} in F . (1) a is a left axis of type λ if (a) a is left absolutely primitive, i.e., A1 = F a. (b) (La − λ)(La − 1)La = 0. (c) (cf. Proposition 3.4) There is a direct sum decomposition of A which is a Z2-grading: +-part −-part A = zA0 }|⊕ A{1 ⊕ z}|{Aλ , recalling that Aλ means Aλ(La). We call this grading the left axial fusion rules. (2) A right axis of type λ is defined similarly. (3) a is an axis (2-sided) of type (λ, δ) if a is a left axis of type λ and a right axis of type δ and, in addition, LaRa = RaLa. Thus A1,1 = F a = A1; in particular A1,δ = Aλ,1 = 0. Hence − − −− A = A++ ⊕ A+ ⊕ A + ⊕ A , ′ ′ is Z2 × Z2 grading of A (multiplication (ǫ,ǫ )(ρ, ρ ) is defined in the obvious way for ǫ,ǫ′, ρ, ρ′ ∈ {+, −}), where ++ • A = A1 ⊕ A0,0, +− • A = A0,δ, −+ • A = Aλ,0, −− • A = Aλ,δ. (4) The axis a is of Jordan type (λ, δ) if Aλ,0 = A0,λ = 0. +− −+ In this case, A = A = 0, A0,0 = A0, and A = A1 ⊕ A0 ⊕ Aλ,δ. 4 LOUIS ROWEN, YOAV SEGEV (This definition is close to commutative, but there are natural noncom- mutative examples given in Examples 3.1 and 3.6.) Note that besides being noncommutative, Definition 1.3(1c) does not re- quire the condition that A0 is a subalgebra, contrary to the usual hypothesis in the commutative theory of axial algebras. But this condition does not seem to pertain to any of the proofs. If a is an axis of type (λ, δ), then by Definition 1.3(3), we can write x ∈ A as x = αxa + x0,0 + x0,δ + xλ,0 + xλ,δ, xγ,ρ ∈ Aγ,ρ, which we call the (2-sided) decomposition of x with respect to a. When a is of Jordan type, we have the much simpler decomposition x = αxa + x0 + xλ,δ with x0 ∈ A0, and xλ,δ ∈ Aλ,δ, which is both the left decomposition and right decomposition. Much of the axial theory (cf. [HRS]) can be generalized to this noncom- mutative setting, as exemplified in the following results Proposition B (Corollary 3.5). (i) An axis a of Jordan type (λ, δ) is in C(A), iff either Aλ,δ = 0, or λ = δ. (ii) Let a 6= b be two axes with ab = ba and a of type (λ, δ). Then either ab =0= bλ,δ, or λ = δ. In particular, if a is of Jordan type, then either a ∈ C(A) or ab = 0. Proposition C (Proposition 3.9). If A is an algebra generated by two axes a and b of Jordan type (whose types may be distinct!), then A = F a + F b + F ab. For flexible algebras we have Theorem D (Theorem 3.7). Suppose A is a flexible algebra. Then (1) Any axis a has some Jordan type (λ, δ), with either λ = δ, so that 2 a ∈ C(A), or λ + δ = 1 (λ 6= δ) and x = 0 for all x ∈ Aλ,δ. (2) Assume that both a and b are not in C(A). Then either ab = 0 or the subalgebra generated by a, b is one of the two examples as in Examples 3.6. 2. Basic properties of idempotents In the following four lemmas (except in part (ii) of Lemma 2.3), one need not assume characteristic 6= 2. 2 2 Lemma 2.1. If a is a flexible idempotent, then La − La = Ra − Ra. FLEXIBLE IDEMPOTENTS IN NONASSOCIATIVE ALGEBRAS 5 Proof. We apply the definition twice: a + ax + (xa)a + xax = (a + xa)(a + x) = ((a + x)a)(a + x)= (a + x)(a(a + x)) = (a + x)(a + ax)= a + a(ax)+ xa + xax, so ax + (xa)a = a(ax)+ xa. 2 2 Lemma 2.2. Suppose a ∈ A is an idempotent satisfying La −La = Ra −Ra. (In particular this holds when a is a flexible idempotent, by Lemma 2.1.) If z is a (λ, δ)-eigenvector, then either δ = λ or δ = 1 − λ. Proof. (λ2 − λ)z = a(az) − az = (za)a − za = (δ2 − δ)z, implying λ2 − λ = δ2 − δ, or (λ − δ)(λ + δ − 1) = 0. Lemma 2.3.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Split Octonions
    Split Octonions Benjamin Prather Florida State University Department of Mathematics November 15, 2017 Group Algebras Split Octonions Let R be a ring (with unity). Prather Let G be a group. Loop Algebras Octonions Denition Moufang Loops An element of group algebra R[G] is the formal sum: Split-Octonions Analysis X Malcev Algebras rngn Summary gn2G Addition is component wise (as a free module). Multiplication follows from the products in R and G, distributivity and commutativity between R and G. Note: If G is innite only nitely many ri are non-zero. Group Algebras Split Octonions Prather Loop Algebras A group algebra is itself a ring. Octonions In particular, a group under multiplication. Moufang Loops Split-Octonions Analysis A set M with a binary operation is called a magma. Malcev Algebras Summary This process can be generalized to magmas. The resulting algebra often inherit the properties of M. Divisibility is a notable exception. Magmas Split Octonions Prather Loop Algebras Octonions Moufang Loops Split-Octonions Analysis Malcev Algebras Summary Loops Split Octonions Prather Loop Algebras In particular, loops are not associative. Octonions It is useful to dene some weaker properties. Moufang Loops power associative: the sub-algebra generated by Split-Octonions Analysis any one element is associative. Malcev Algebras diassociative: the sub-algebra generated by any Summary two elements is associative. associative: the sub-algebra generated by any three elements is associative. Loops Split Octonions Prather Loop Algebras Octonions Power associativity gives us (xx)x = x(xx). Moufang Loops This allows x n to be well dened. Split-Octonions Analysis −1 Malcev Algebras Diassociative loops have two sided inverses, x .
    [Show full text]
  • Euclidean Jordan Algebras for Optimization
    Euclidean Jordan algebras for optimization Michael Orlitzky Euclidean Jordan algebras for optimization Michael Orlitzky Cover image by Vexels March 23, 2021 WARNING ¡ CUIDADO ! ACHTUNG This is a draft. It contains more or less correct proofs of statements that say more or less what they should. Beyond that, I make no promises. I’ve made many, many, many, many large-scale changes to notation without ever going back to proofread from page one. Caveat emptor. 1 Contents Contents2 Glossary5 1 Preface6 1.1 Notation notation........................... 10 I Fundamentals 11 2 Vector space structure 12 2.1 Algebraic building blocks...................... 12 2.2 Vector and Hilbert spaces...................... 17 2.3 Continuity and compactness..................... 26 2.4 Algebras................................ 29 2.5 Solutions to exercises......................... 33 3 Polynomials and power-associativity 35 3.1 Univariate polynomials........................ 35 3.2 Multivariate polynomials....................... 44 3.3 Polynomial ring embeddings..................... 56 3.4 Rational functions.......................... 58 3.5 Power-associative algebras...................... 60 3.6 Polynomial continuity........................ 63 3.7 Solutions to exercises......................... 68 4 Linear Algebra 72 4.1 Linear operators, matrix representation.............. 72 4.2 Eigenvalues and self-adjoint operators............... 76 4.3 Positive semi-definite operators................... 86 4.4 Characteristic and minimal polynomials.............. 87 4.5 Solutions
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1412.2365V1 [Math.AG]
    POLARIZATION ALGEBRAS AND THEIR RELATIONS Ualbai Umirbaev1 Abstract. Using an approach to the Jacobian Conjecture by L.M. Dru˙zkowski and K. Rusek [12], G. Gorni and G. Zampieri [19], and A.V. Yagzhev [27], we describe a correspondence between finite dimensional symmetric algebras and homogeneous tuples of elements of polynomial algebras. We show that this correspondence closely relates Albert’s problem [10, Problem 1.1] in classical ring theory and the homogeneous de- pendence problem [13, page 145, Problem 7.1.5] in affine algebraic geometry related to the Jacobian Conjecture. We demonstrate these relations in concrete examples and formulate some open questions. Mathematics Subject Classification (2010): Primary 14R15, 17A40, 17A50; Sec- ondary 14R10, 17A36. Key words: the Jacobian Conjecture, polynomial mappings, homogeneous depen- dence, Engel algebras, nilpotent and solvable algebras. 1. Introduction The main objective of this paper is to connect two groups of specialists who are working on a closely connected problems and sometimes have intersections. Joining the efforts of these groups may be fruitful in studying the Jacobian Conjecture [13]. Namely, Albert’s problem [10, Problem 1.1] in classical ring theory and the homogeneous dependence prob- lem [13, page 145, Problem 7.1.5] in affine algebraic geometry are closely connected. Ring theory specialists are focused in studying only binary algebras and have some positive results in small dimensions. Affine algebraic geometry specialists have also some positive results in small dimensions and have some negative results for m-ary algebras if m ≥ 3. To make the subject more intriguing let’s start with two examples.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1808.03808V1 [Math.RA]
    THE UNIVERSALITY OF ONE HALF IN COMMUTATIVE NONASSOCIATIVE ALGEBRAS WITH IDENTITIES VLADIMIR G. TKACHEV Abstract. In this paper we will explain an interesting phenomenon which occurs in general nonasso- ciative algebras. More precisely, we establish that any finite-dimensional commutative nonassociative 1 algebra over a field satisfying an identity always contains 2 in its Peirce spectrum. We also show 1 that the corresponding 2 -Peirce module satisfies the Jordan type fusion laws. The present approach is based on an explicit representation of the Peirce polynomial for an arbitrary algebra identity. To work with fusion rules, we develop the concept of the Peirce symbol and show that it can be explicitly determined for a wide class of algebras. We also illustrate our approach by further applications to genetic algebras and algebra of minimal cones (the so-called Hsiang algebras). 1. Introduction Algebras whose associativity is replaced by identities were a central topic in mathematics in the 20th century, including the classical theory of Lie and Jordan algebras. Recall that an algebra is called Jordan if any two elements y,z ∈ A satisfy the following two identities: (1) zy − yz =0, (2) z((zz)y) − (zz)(zy)=0. The Peirce decomposition relative to an algebra idempotent is an important tool in the structure study of any nonassociative algebra. For example, the multiplication operator by an idempotent in a Jordan algebra is diagonalizable and the corresponding Peirce decomposition (relative to an idempotent c) into invariant subspaces 1 (3) A = Ac(0) ⊕ Ac(1) ⊕ Ac( 2 ) is compatible with the multiplication in the sense that the multiplication of eigenvectors is described by certain multiplication rules, also known as fusion laws.
    [Show full text]
  • On a Class of Malcev-Admissible Algebras
    47 J. Korean Math. Soc. Vo1.19, No. 1, 1982 ON A CLASS OF MALCEV-ADMISSIBLE ALGEBRAS by Youngso Ko and Hyo Chul Myung 1. Introduction For an algebra A over a field F, denote by A-the algebra with multiplication [x, y]=xy-yx defined on the same vector space as A, where juxtaposition xy is the product in A. Then A is termed Malcev-admissible if A-is a Malcev algebra; that is, the Malcev identity [[x, y], [x, z]]= [[[x, y], z], x]+[[[y, z], x], xJ+[[[z, xJ, xJ, yJ is satisfied for all x, y, zE A. An algebra A is called Lie-admissible if A-is a Lie algebra, namely, A- satisfies the Jacobi identity [[x, y], zJ + [[z, xJ, yJ + [[y, zJ, x] = 0 for x, y, zE A. It is well known that every Lie-admissible and alternative algebra is Malcev-admissible [8]. Thus a Malcev-admissible algebra is a natural generalization of Lie-admissible, alternative, and Malcev algebras. We assume hereafter that A is an algebra over F of characteristic =1= 2. Denote also by A+ the algebra with multiplication xoy= ~ (xy+yx) defined on the vector space A. The product xy in A is then given by xy= ~ [x, yJ+xoy. (1) Thus every Malcev algebra can occur as the attached algebra A-for a Malcev­ admissible algebra A by merely varying the commutative product xoy. This indicates that MaIcev-admissibility alone is too broad a condition to yield a fruitful structure theory. It has been shown that the flexible law (xy)x=x(yx) (2) for x, yEA is a useful restriction on A that imposes constraints on the product xoy and its relations with the product [, J.
    [Show full text]
  • Abraham Adrian Albert 1905-1972 by Nathan Jacobson
    BULLETIN OF THE AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY Volume 80, Number 6, November 1974 ABRAHAM ADRIAN ALBERT 1905-1972 BY NATHAN JACOBSON Adrian Albert, one of the foremost algebraists of the world and Presi­ dent of the American Mathematical Society from 1965 to 1967, died on June 6, 1972. For almost a year before his death it had become apparent to his friends that his manner had altered from its customary vigor to one which was rather subdued. At first they attributed this to a letdown which might have resulted from Albert's having recently relinquished a very demanding administrative position (Dean of the Division of Physical Sciences at the University of Chicago) that he had held for a number of years. Eventually it became known that he was gravely ill of physical causes that had their origin in diabetes with which he had been afflicted for many years. Albert was a first generation American and a second generation Ameri­ can mathematician following that of E. H. Moore, Oswald Veblen, L. E. Dickson and G. D. Birkhoff. His mother came to the United States from Kiev and his father came from England.1 The father had run away from his home in Yilna at the age of fourteen, and on arriving in England, he discarded his family name (which remains unknown) and took in its place the name Albert after the prince consort of Queen Victoria. Albert's father was something of a scholar, with a deep interest in English literature. He taught school for a while in England but after coming to the United States he became a salesman, a shopkeeper, and a manufacturer.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1205.2910V1 [Math.RA] 13 May 2012 1.1
    POISSON SUPERALGEBRAS AS NONASSOCIATIVE ALGEBRAS ELISABETH REMM Abstract. Poisson superalgebras are known as a Z2-graded vector space with two oper- ations, an associative supercommutative multiplication and a super bracket tied up by the super Leibniz relation. We show that we can consider a single nonassociative multiplica- tion containing all these datas and then consider Poisson superalgebra as non associative algebras. 1. Generalities on Poisson algebras 1.1. Poisson algebras. Let K be a field of characteristic 0. A K-Poisson algebra is a K- vector space P equipped with two bilinear products denoted by x · y and {x, y}, having the following properties: (1) The couple (P, ·) is an associative commutative K-algebra. (2) The couple (P, {, }) is a K-Lie algebra. (3) The products · and {, } satisfy the Leibniz rule: {x · y, z} = x ·{y, z} + {x, z}· y, for any x, y, z ∈ P. The product {, } is usually called Poisson bracket and the Leibniz identity means that the Poisson bracket acts as a derivation of the associative product. In [3], one proves that any Poisson structure on a K-vector space is also given by a nonas- sociative product, denoted by xy and satisfying the non associative identity (1) 3A(x, y, z)=(xz)y +(yz)x − (yx)z − (zx)y. where A(x, y, z) is the associator A(x, y, z)=(xy)z −x(yz). In fact, if P is a Poisson algebra arXiv:1205.2910v1 [math.RA] 13 May 2012 given by the associative product x · y and the Poisson bracket {x, y}, then xy is given by xy = {x, y} + x · y.
    [Show full text]
  • Complexity and Unsolvability Properties of Nilpotency Irvin R
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Digital Repository @ Iowa State University Mathematics Publications Mathematics 1990 Complexity and Unsolvability Properties of Nilpotency Irvin R. Hentzel Iowa State University, [email protected] David Pokrass Jacobs Clemson University Follow this and additional works at: http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/math_pubs Part of the Algebra Commons The ompc lete bibliographic information for this item can be found at http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ math_pubs/140. For information on how to cite this item, please visit http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ howtocite.html. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Mathematics at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Mathematics Publications by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Complexity and Unsolvability Properties of Nilpotency Abstract A nonassociative algebra is nilpotent if there is some n such that the product of any n elements, no matter how they are associated, is zero. Several related, but more general, notions are left nilpotency, solvability, local nilpotency, and nillity. First the complexity of several decision problems for these properties is examined. In finite-dimensional algebras over a finite field it is shown that solvability and nilpotency can be decided in polynomial time. Over Q, nilpotency can be decided in polynomial time, while the algorithm for testing solvability uses a polynomial number of arithmetic operations, but is not polynomial time. Also presented is a polynomial time probabilistic algorithm for deciding left nillity.
    [Show full text]
  • Hermann Weyl - Space-Time-Matter
    - As far as I see, all a priori statements in physics have their origin in ... http://www.markus-maute.de/trajectory/trajectory.html Free counter and web stats Music of the week (Spanish): Home | Akivis Algebra Abstract Algebra *-Algebra (4,3) - Association Type Identities (4,2) - Association Type Identities (4,2) - Association Type Identities Taking the identities with , for each of them we can replace the element in one of the positions by another one. I.e. there are identities of rank all in all. These are also given in [1] and to facilitate comparisons, we'll list the labelling used there as well. Identity Abbreviation [1] Type of Quasigroup Right-alternative Right-alternative Jordan identity Trivial if right-alternative Trivial if flexible Trivial if left-alternative Trivial if mono-associative Jordan identity Trivial if mono-associative Trivial if right-alternative Trivial if flexible Trivial if left-alternative Jordan identity Jordan identity Due to the property of unique resolvability of quasigroups. Furthermore we can replace two elements by two other identical elements. For each identity there are inequivalent ways of doing so. Hence we get another rank- identities, listed in the following table: Identity Abbreviation [1] Type of Quasigroup Trivial if left-alternative Trivial if flexible 1 of 80 28.01.2015 18:08 - As far as I see, all a priori statements in physics have their origin in ... http://www.markus-maute.de/trajectory/trajectory.html Trivial if right-alternative Trivial if right-alternative Trivial if flexible Trivial if left-alternative See also: Association type identities (4,3) - association type identities Google books: [1] Geometry and Algebra of Multidimensional Three-webs (1992) - M.
    [Show full text]
  • Non-Associative Algebras and Quantum Physics
    Manfred Liebmann, Horst R¨uhaak, Bernd Henschenmacher Non-Associative Algebras and Quantum Physics A Historical Perspective September 11, 2019 arXiv:1909.04027v1 [math-ph] 7 Sep 2019 Contents 1 Pascual Jordan’s attempts to generalize Quantum Mechanics .............. 3 2 The 1930ies: Jordan algebras and some early speculations concerning a “fundamental length” ................................................... .. 5 3 The 1950ies: Non-distributive “algebras” .................................. 17 4 The late 1960ies: Giving up power-associativity and a new idea about measurements ................................................... .......... 33 5 Horst R¨uhaak’s PhD-thesis: Matrix algebras over the octonions ........... 41 6 The Fundamental length algebra and Jordan’s final ideas .................. 47 7 Lawrence Biedenharn’s work on non-associative quantum mechanics ....... 57 8 Recent developments ................................................... ... 63 9 Acknowledgements ................................................... ..... 67 10 References ................................................... .............. 69 Contents 1 Summary. We review attempts by Pascual Jordan and other researchers, most notably Lawrence Biedenharn to generalize quantum mechanics by passing from associative matrix or operator algebras to non-associative algebras. We start with Jordan’s work from the early 1930ies leading to Jordan algebras and the first attempt to incorporate the alternative ring of octonions into physics. Jordan’s work on the octonions from 1932
    [Show full text]
  • A Theorem on Commutative Power Associative Loop Algebras1
    1955] COMMUTATIVEPOWER ASSOCIATIVELOOP ALGEBRAS 279 Then, for Gc^K it is necessary and sufficient that R be cyclically equiva- lent to An(ai, a2) where A (ai, a2) is a primitive element in the free group F(au a2). References 1. J. H. C. Whitehead, On equivalent sets of elements in a free group, Ann. of Math, vol. 37 (1936). 2. A. G. Kurosh, Theory of groups, Gostekhizdat, 1944 (in Russian). New York University A THEOREM ON COMMUTATIVE POWER ASSOCIATIVE LOOP ALGEBRAS1 LOWELL J. PAIGE Let L be a loop, written multiplicatively, and P an arbitrary field. Define multiplication in the vector space A, of all formal sums of a finite number of elements in L with coefficients in P, by the use of both distributive laws and the definition of multiplication in P. The resulting loop algebra A (L) over F is a linear nonassociative algebra (associative, if and only if L is a group). An algebra A is said to be power associative if the subalgebra F[x] generated by an element x is an associative algebra for every x of A. Theorem. Let A (L) be a loop algebra over afield of characteristic not 2. A necessary and sufficient condition that A(L) be a commutative, power associative algebra is that L be a commutative group. Proof. Assume that A(L) is a commutative, power associative algebra. Clearly L must be commutative and x2x2 = (x2-x) x for all x of A(L). Under the hypothesis that the characteristic of F is not 2, a linearization2 of this power identity yields Presented to the Society, December 28, 1953; received by the editors June 2, 1954.
    [Show full text]
  • Hom-Power Associative Algebras, in Which the Defining Identities (1.0.2) Are Relaxed by a Certain Linear Self-Map, Called the Twisting Map
    HOM-POWER ASSOCIATIVE ALGEBRAS DONALD YAU Abstract. A generalization of power associative algebra, called Hom-power associative algebra, is studied. The main result says that a multiplicative Hom-algebra is Hom-power associative if and only if it satisfies two identities of degrees three and four. It generalizes Albert’s result that power associativity is equivalent to third and fourth power associativity. In particular, multiplicative right Hom-alternative algebras and non-commutative Hom-Jordan algebras are Hom-power associative. 1. Introduction Power associative algebras were first systematically studied by Albert [1, 2]. These non-associative algebras play an important role in the studies of associative bilinear forms, loops, the Cayley-Dickson algebras, and Banach algebras, among many other subjects [3, 6, 14]. A power associative algebra can be defined conceptually as an algebra in which every element generates an associative sub-algebra. Equivalently, power associative algebras can be algebraically characterized as follows. For an element x in an algebra A, define the right powers x1 = x and xn+1 = xnx (1.0.1) for n ≥ 1. Then an algebra A is power associative if and only if xn = xn−ixi (1.0.2) for all x ∈ A, n ≥ 2, and i ∈ {1,...,n − 1}. Therefore, one can also think of (1.0.2) as the defining identities for power associative algebras. If A satisfies (1.0.2) for a particular integer n, then A is called nth power associative. A theorem of Albert [1] says that (in characteristic 0, which is assumed throughout this paper) an algebra is power associative if and only if it is third and fourth power associative, which in turn is equivalent to x2x = xx2 and x4 = x2x2 (1.0.3) arXiv:1007.4118v1 [math.RA] 23 Jul 2010 for all elements x.
    [Show full text]