DOCSLIB.ORG

Categories of Modules with Differentials

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

JOURNAL OF ALGEBRA 185, 50]73Ž. 1996 ARTICLE NO. 0312 Categories of Modules with Differentials Paul Popescu Department of Mathematics, Uni¨ersity of Craio¨a, 13, A.I. Cuza st., Craio¨a, 1100, Romania Communicated by Walter Feit CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Received August 1, 1994 Provided by Elsevier - Publisher Connector 1. INTRODUCTION The definitions of the module with arrow Ž.module fleche , the infinitesi- mal module, and the Lie pseudoalgebra, as used here, are considered inwx 7 . Moreover, we define the preinfinitesimal module, called inwx 1 ``un pre- espace d'Elie Cartan regulier.'' Inwx 7 the Lie functor is constructed from the category of differentiable groupoids in the category of Lie algebroids, but it is inwx 2 that the first general and abstract treatment of the algebraic properties of Lie alge- broids is made, giving a clear construction of the morphisms of Lie algebroids. We shall use it fully in this paper to define completely the categories M W A Ž.Ž.modules and arrows , P I M preinfinitesimal modules , IMŽ.Ž.infinitesimal modules , and L P A Lie pseudoalgebras ; we call these categories the categories of modules with differentials. We notice that in wx7 and wx 1 the objects of these categories and the subcategories of modules over a fixed algebra are considered. Inwx 3 the category of L P A of Lie pseudoalgebras is defined and some aspects related to the functional covariance or contravariance correspondence with categories constructed with additional structures on vector bundles are studied. In Section 2 we give a brief description of the category MA , of modules over commutative k-algebrasŽ considered also inwx 3. , and we define a strict category of modules using a suitable functor. In Sections 3 and 4 we define the categories of modules with differen- tials. In Section 5 we study certain wide and strict categories of modules with differentials which are defined in this paper. It is proved that, under suitable conditions on the functor which define them, they admit direct products. 50 0021-8693r96 $18.00 Copyright Q 1996 by Academic Press, Inc. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved. MODULES WITH DIFFERENTIALS 51 Finally, in Section 6, we study the pullback, which extends the inductor defined inwx 8 , using the ideas from wx 2 . We define the pullback in categories of modules with differentials and in categories of vector bundles with differentialsŽ. where it is in fact a fibred product , extending the definition of the inductor given inwx 2 in the case of Lie algebroids. Using two papers of the authorwx 5, 6 , we consider thoroughly with some examples the study of differential modules, considering categories which we call categories of vector bundles with differentials. They are extensions of the Lie algebroidwx 7, 4, 2 and are very close to it. This paper is the first part of a study about categories with differentials. The second part will contain the study of actions, fibrations and ideals, using the same approach as inwx 2 for Lie algebroids and groupoids. We intend this paper to be useful to those who follow the study of differential geometry using algebraic tools and also to those who use geometric examples in algebra. 2. CATEGORIES OF MODULES The largest category whose objects and morphisms we shall use in this paper is a contravariant category of modules MA. The modules are considered over commutative, associative and unitary algebras. The alge- bras are taken in their turn over a commutative and unitary ring k, fixed from now on. The category MA is considered for example inwx 3 , where it is ¤ denoted as Mod . The commutative, associative, and unitary algebras over k and their morphisms are the objects and the morphisms of a category Ak denoted simply by A. Ž. The objects of the category MA are coupled A, L , where A is an object of A and L is an A-module. The morphisms of two objects Ž AXX, L . X and Ž.A, L are couples Ž.w, c , where w: A ª A is a morphism of A and XX X Ž c:LªAmA Lis a morphism of A -modules. The tensor product is an A-module, considering AX as an A-module through w.. We denote such a Ž XX.Ž. morphism in MA by A , L ªŽw, c . A, L . The composition law of two morphisms in M: ŽA , L . Ž.Ž.ŽA , L , A , L A , L .is 00ªŽw11,c.11 11ªŽw22,c.22 Ž.A,L Ž.A,L, where, if 00ªŽw1212(w,c)c. XL,cŽ.X aXXA L, g01sÝiAm11 ig0mA 1 i cŽ.XXbiXYAL 2 isÝamA22ag1mA 2 a 52 PAUL POPESCU then Ž.Ž.c c X a w bi X Y A L .1Ž. 21) s Ýi1Ž.amA22ag 0mA2 i,a Notice that if A00is an object of A then the category of A -modules is a subcategory M of M . It has as objects all the objects and the morphisms A 0 A of M which have the form Ž.Ž.A , L and id , c , respectively. Taking into A 0 A 0 account the canonical isomorphism A L L, a X aX Ž.2 0mAiAiii00l ÝÝm l ii for every A -module L, there is an isomorphism of categories M and the 0 A0 category of A0-modules. From now on we shall not make any distinction between them. Notice also that M is not a full subcategory of M . A0 A Consider now AX a subcategory of A. In the same manner as above, denote by MAX the subcategory of MA whose objects and morphisms are defined by couples in which the algebra is an object of AX and the morphism is a morphism of AX. Consider now C00an arbitrary category and F: C ª MAa functor; we ŽXŽX.. denote as C0 MA a category which has as objects couples M , FM with MX an object in C X, and as morphisms couples ŽwX, FŽwX .. for wX morphism of C00; we say that C MAis a strict category of modules induced by F.We X notice also that F induces a forgetful functor F0: C ª A that generates a category of algebrasŽ. see Section 5 . An important example of a strict category of modules is given below. It is used frequently in the examples of this paper. ` EXAMPLE 2.1. Take as C0 the category V B of C -vector bundles which have finite dimensional fibers. We denote by j s Ž.E, p, B such a vector bundle which has the total space E, the base space B and the projection p, all smoothŽ i.e., of class C`.. The morphisms of two vector X Ž XX X.Ž.X bundles j s E , p , B and j are couples f00, f , where f : B ª B is a X smooth map and f: E ª E is an f0-morphism of vector bundles. There is induced U X U f00: FŽ.B ª F ŽB ., f Ž.u s u( f0, a morphism of commutative, associative and unitary algebras and U X U Ž X . f : E ª fE0 which is uniquely determined by a F B -module morphism, denoted also by f U : U X U f : GŽ.j ª G Žf0j .. MODULES WITH DIFFERENTIALS 53 Notice that for a smooth manifold B we denote as FŽ.B the real algebra of smooth real functions on B and for the vector bundle j s Ž.E,p,Bwe denote as G Ž.Ž.j the F B -module of sections on j. From the isomorphism of FŽ BX .-modules XXUX FBŽ.mFŽB.G Ž.j ªG Žf0j ., umXªuX, Ž.UUXX Ž . where X g G fE0 is x ª x , Xf Ž x. , it follows that f can be also Ž X .Ž.Ž0 . considered taking values in F B mFŽ B. G j seewx 2 for more details . For k s R a contravariant functor F0: V B ª MA defined by the formula U U F00Ž.j s Ž.F Ž.B , G Ž.j , Ff Ž0,f .s Žf0,f . is obtained. This defines a strict category of modules V B MA , used in the next examples of this paper. 3. CATEGORIES OF MODULES WITH ARROWS In this section and in the following one we define some categories which we call categories of modules with differentials; they contain as subcategories those obtained fixing an algebraŽ seewx 7. The construction is inspired by wx2 ; the examples are fromwx 5 , wx 6 , and wx 2 . Most of the notation fromwx 7 andwx 2 is used, pointing out the extensions given here. Let A be a commutative, associate, and unitary k-algebra. For the p A-modules L and M we denote as Hom AŽ.L, M the A-module of alter- nated A-linear p-forms from L to M and as DerŽ.A the A-module of derivations of A Ž.which is a Lie k-algebra . An A-module with arrow Ž.Žm.w.a. cf.wx 7 module flecheÂÂ.is an A-module M Mtogether with an A-module morphism r s r : M ª DerŽ.A called an anchor. As an example, DerŽ.A and its identity morphism is an m.w.a. If M r s 0 we say that the m.w.a. is tri¨ial.If Mis an A-m.w.a. we make the notation M wxX,aMsrŽ.Ž.Xa, XgM,agA. DEFINITION 3.1wx 7 . A morphism of A-m.w.a.'s L and M is an element 1 Ž.
Recommended publications
  • Arxiv:2001.09075V1 [Math.AG] 24 Jan 2020

    Arxiv:2001.09075V1 [Math.AG] 24 Jan 2020

    A topos-theoretic view of difference algebra Ivan Tomašić Ivan Tomašić, School of Mathematical Sciences, Queen Mary Uni- versity of London, London, E1 4NS, United Kingdom E-mail address: [email protected] arXiv:2001.09075v1 [math.AG] 24 Jan 2020 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary . Secondary . Key words and phrases. difference algebra, topos theory, cohomology, enriched category Contents Introduction iv Part I. E GA 1 1. Category theory essentials 2 2. Topoi 7 3. Enriched category theory 13 4. Internal category theory 25 5. Algebraic structures in enriched categories and topoi 41 6. Topos cohomology 51 7. Enriched homological algebra 56 8. Algebraicgeometryoverabasetopos 64 9. Relative Galois theory 70 10. Cohomologyinrelativealgebraicgeometry 74 11. Group cohomology 76 Part II. σGA 87 12. Difference categories 88 13. The topos of difference sets 96 14. Generalised difference categories 111 15. Enriched difference presheaves 121 16. Difference algebra 126 17. Difference homological algebra 136 18. Difference algebraic geometry 142 19. Difference Galois theory 148 20. Cohomologyofdifferenceschemes 151 21. Cohomologyofdifferencealgebraicgroups 157 22. Comparison to literature 168 Bibliography 171 iii Introduction 0.1. The origins of difference algebra. Difference algebra can be traced back to considerations involving recurrence relations, recursively defined sequences, rudi- mentary dynamical systems, functional equations and the study of associated dif- ference equations. Let k be a commutative ring with identity, and let us write R = kN for the ring (k-algebra) of k-valued sequences, and let σ : R R be the shift endomorphism given by → σ(x0, x1,...) = (x1, x2,...). The first difference operator ∆ : R R is defined as → ∆= σ id, − and, for r N, the r-th difference operator ∆r : R R is the r-th compositional power/iterate∈ of ∆, i.e., → r r ∆r = (σ id)r = ( 1)r−iσi.
  • Two Constructions in Monoidal Categories Equivariantly Extended Drinfel’D Centers and Partially Dualized Hopf Algebras

    Two Constructions in Monoidal Categories Equivariantly Extended Drinfel’D Centers and Partially Dualized Hopf Algebras

    Two constructions in monoidal categories Equivariantly extended Drinfel'd Centers and Partially dualized Hopf Algebras Dissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades an der Fakult¨atf¨urMathematik, Informatik und Naturwissenschaften Fachbereich Mathematik der Universit¨atHamburg vorgelegt von Alexander Barvels Hamburg, 2014 Tag der Disputation: 02.07.2014 Folgende Gutachter empfehlen die Annahme der Dissertation: Prof. Dr. Christoph Schweigert und Prof. Dr. Sonia Natale Contents Introduction iii Topological field theories and generalizations . iii Extending braided categories . vii Algebraic structures and monoidal categories . ix Outline . .x 1. Algebra in monoidal categories 1 1.1. Conventions and notations . .1 1.2. Categories of modules . .3 1.3. Bialgebras and Hopf algebras . 12 2. Yetter-Drinfel'd modules 25 2.1. Definitions . 25 2.2. Equivalences of Yetter-Drinfel'd categories . 31 3. Graded categories and group actions 39 3.1. Graded categories and (co)graded bialgebras . 39 3.2. Weak group actions . 41 3.3. Equivariant categories and braidings . 48 4. Equivariant Drinfel'd center 51 4.1. Half-braidings . 51 4.2. The main construction . 55 4.3. The Hopf algebra case . 61 5. Partial dualization of Hopf algebras 71 5.1. Radford biproduct and projection theorem . 71 5.2. The partial dual . 73 5.3. Examples . 75 A. Category theory 89 A.1. Basic notions . 89 A.2. Adjunctions and monads . 91 i ii Contents A.3. Monoidal categories . 92 A.4. Modular categories . 97 References 99 Introduction The fruitful interplay between topology and algebra has a long tradi- tion. On one hand, invariants of topological spaces, such as the homotopy groups, homology groups, etc.
  • The Elliptic Drinfeld Center of a Premodular Category Arxiv

    The Elliptic Drinfeld Center of a Premodular Category Arxiv

    The Elliptic Drinfeld Center of a Premodular Category Ying Hong Tham Abstract Given a tensor category C, one constructs its Drinfeld center Z(C) which is a braided tensor category, having as objects pairs (X; λ), where X ∈ Obj(C) and λ is a el half-braiding. For a premodular category C, we construct a new category Z (C) which 1 2 i we call the Elliptic Drinfeld Center, which has objects (X; λ ; λ ), where the λ 's are half-braidings that satisfy some compatibility conditions. We discuss an SL2(Z)-action el on Z (C) that is related to the anomaly appearing in Reshetikhin-Turaev theory. This construction is motivated from the study of the extended Crane-Yetter TQFT, in particular the category associated to the once punctured torus. 1 Introduction and Preliminaries In [CY1993], Crane and Yetter define a 4d TQFT using a state-sum involving 15j symbols, based on a sketch by Ooguri [Oog1992]. The state-sum begins with a color- ing of the 2- and 3-simplices of a triangulation of the four manifold by integers from 0; 1; : : : ; r. These 15j symbols then arise as the evaluation of a ribbon graph living on the boundary of a 4-simplex. The labels 0; 1; : : : ; r correspond to simple objects of the Verlinde modular category, the semi-simple subquotient of the category of finite dimen- πi r 2 sional representations of the quantum group Uqsl2 at q = e as defined in [AP1995]. Later Crane, Kauffman, and Yetter [CKY1997] extend this~ definition+ to colorings with objects from a premodular category (i.e.
  • Stable Model Categories Are Categories of Modules 1

    Stable Model Categories Are Categories of Modules 1

    STABLE MODEL CATEGORIES ARE CATEGORIES OF MODULES STEFAN SCHWEDE AND BROOKE SHIPLEY Abstract: A stable model category is a setting for homotopy theory where the suspension functor is invertible. The prototypical examples are the category of spectra in the sense of stable homotopy theory and the category of unbounded chain complexes of modules over a ring. In this paper we develop methods for deciding when two stable model categories represent ‘the same homotopy theory’. We show that stable model categories with a single compact generator are equivalent to modules over a ring spectrum. More generally stable model categories with a set of generators are characterized as modules over a ‘ring spectrum with several objects’, i.e., as spectrum valued diagram categories. We also prove a Morita theorem which shows how equivalences between module categories over ring spectra can be realized by smashing with a pair of bimodules. Finally, we characterize stable model categories which represent the derived category of a ring. This is a slight generalization of Rickard’s work on derived equivalent rings. We also include a proof of the model category equivalence of modules over the Eilenberg-Mac Lane spectrum HR and (unbounded) chain complexes of R-modules for a ring R. 1. Introduction The recent discovery of highly structured categories of spectra has opened the way for a new wholesale use of algebra in stable homotopy theory. In this paper we use this new algebra of spectra to characterize stable model categories, the settings for doing stable homotopy theory, as categories of highly structured modules. This characterization also leads to a Morita theory for equivalences between categories of highly structured modules.
  • Arxiv:1909.05807V1 [Math.RA] 12 Sep 2019 Cs T

    Arxiv:1909.05807V1 [Math.RA] 12 Sep 2019 Cs T

    MODULES OVER TRUSSES VS MODULES OVER RINGS: DIRECT SUMS AND FREE MODULES TOMASZ BRZEZINSKI´ AND BERNARD RYBOLOWICZ Abstract. Categorical constructions on heaps and modules over trusses are con- sidered and contrasted with the corresponding constructions on groups and rings. These include explicit description of free heaps and free Abelian heaps, coprod- ucts or direct sums of Abelian heaps and modules over trusses, and description and analysis of free modules over trusses. It is shown that the direct sum of two non-empty Abelian heaps is always infinite and isomorphic to the heap associated to the direct sums of the group retracts of both heaps and Z. Direct sum is used to extend a given truss to a ring-type truss or a unital truss (or both). Free mod- ules are constructed as direct sums of a truss. It is shown that only free rank-one modules are free as modules over the associated truss. On the other hand, if a (finitely generated) module over a truss associated to a ring is free, then so is the corresponding quotient-by-absorbers module over this ring. 1. Introduction Trusses and skew trusses were defined in [3] in order to capture the nature of the distinctive distributive law that characterises braces and skew braces [12], [6], [9]. A (one-sided) truss is a set with a ternary operation which makes it into a heap or herd (see [10], [11], [1] or [13]) together with an associative binary operation that distributes (on one side or both) over the heap ternary operation. If the specific bi- nary operation admits it, a choice of a particular element could fix a group structure on a heap in a way that turns the truss into a ring or a brace-like system (which becomes a brace provided the binary operation admits inverses).
  • Arxiv:Math/0310146V1 [Math.AT] 10 Oct 2003 Usinis: Question Fr Most Aut the the of Algebra”

    Arxiv:Math/0310146V1 [Math.AT] 10 Oct 2003 Usinis: Question Fr Most Aut the the of Algebra”

    MORITA THEORY IN ABELIAN, DERIVED AND STABLE MODEL CATEGORIES STEFAN SCHWEDE These notes are based on lectures given at the Workshop on Structured ring spectra and their applications. This workshop took place January 21-25, 2002, at the University of Glasgow and was organized by Andy Baker and Birgit Richter. Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Morita theory in abelian categories 2 3. Morita theory in derived categories 6 3.1. The derived category 6 3.2. Derived equivalences after Rickard and Keller 14 3.3. Examples 19 4. Morita theory in stable model categories 21 4.1. Stable model categories 22 4.2. Symmetric ring and module spectra 25 4.3. Characterizing module categories over ring spectra 32 4.4. Morita context for ring spectra 35 4.5. Examples 38 References 42 1. Introduction The paper [Mo58] by Kiiti Morita seems to be the first systematic study of equivalences between module categories. Morita treats both contravariant equivalences (which he calls arXiv:math/0310146v1 [math.AT] 10 Oct 2003 dualities of module categories) and covariant equivalences (which he calls isomorphisms of module categories) and shows that they always arise from suitable bimodules, either via contravariant hom functors (for ‘dualities’) or via covariant hom functors and tensor products (for ‘isomorphisms’). The term ‘Morita theory’ is now used for results concerning equivalences of various kinds of module categories. The authors of the obituary article [AGH] consider Morita’s theorem “probably one of the most frequently used single results in modern algebra”. In this survey article, we focus on the covariant form of Morita theory, so our basic question is: When do two ‘rings’ have ‘equivalent’ module categories ? We discuss this question in different contexts: • (Classical) When are the module categories of two rings equivalent as categories ? Date: February 1, 2008.
  • Derived Categories of Modules and Coherent Sheaves

    Derived Categories of Modules and Coherent Sheaves

    Derived Categories of Modules and Coherent Sheaves Yuriy A. Drozd Abstract We present recent results on derived categories of modules and coherent sheaves, namely, tame{wild dichotomy and semi-continuity theorem for derived categories over finite dimensional algebras, as well as explicit calculations for derived categories of modules over nodal rings and of coherent sheaves over projective configurations of types A and A~. This paper is a survey of some recent results on the structure of derived categories obtained by the author in collaboration with Viktor Bekkert and Igor Burban [6, 11, 12]. The origin of this research was the study of Cohen{ Macaulay modules and vector bundles by Gert-Martin Greuel and myself [27, 28, 29, 30] and some ideas from the work of Huisgen-Zimmermann and Saor´ın [42]. Namely, I understood that the technique of \matrix problems," briefly explained below in subsection 2.3, could be successfully applied to the calculations in derived categories, almost in the same way as it was used in the representation theory of finite-dimensional algebras, in study of Cohen{ Macaulay modules, etc. The first step in this direction was the semi-continuity theorem for derived categories [26] presented in subsection 2.1. Then Bekkert and I proved the tame{wild dichotomy for derived categories over finite di- mensional algebras (see subsection 2.2). At the same time, Burban and I described the indecomposable objects in the derived categories over nodal rings (see Section 3) and projective configurations of types A and A~ (see Sec- tion 4). Note that it follows from [23, 29] that these are the only cases, where such a classification is possible; for all other pure noetherian rings (or projec- tive curves) even the categories of modules (respectively, of vector bundles) are wild.
  • Tensor Categorical Foundations of Algebraic Geometry

    Tensor Categorical Foundations of Algebraic Geometry

    Tensor categorical foundations of algebraic geometry Martin Brandenburg { 2014 { Abstract Tannaka duality and its extensions by Lurie, Sch¨appi et al. reveal that many schemes as well as algebraic stacks may be identified with their tensor categories of quasi-coherent sheaves. In this thesis we study constructions of cocomplete tensor categories (resp. cocontinuous tensor functors) which usually correspond to constructions of schemes (resp. their morphisms) in the case of quasi-coherent sheaves. This means to globalize the usual local-global algebraic geometry. For this we first have to develop basic commutative algebra in an arbitrary cocom- plete tensor category. We then discuss tensor categorical globalizations of affine morphisms, projective morphisms, immersions, classical projective embeddings (Segre, Pl¨ucker, Veronese), blow-ups, fiber products, classifying stacks and finally tangent bundles. It turns out that the universal properties of several moduli spaces or stacks translate to the corresponding tensor categories. arXiv:1410.1716v1 [math.AG] 7 Oct 2014 This is a slightly expanded version of the author's PhD thesis. Contents 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Background . .1 1.2 Results . .3 1.3 Acknowledgements . 13 2 Preliminaries 14 2.1 Category theory . 14 2.2 Algebraic geometry . 17 2.3 Local Presentability . 21 2.4 Density and Adams stacks . 22 2.5 Extension result . 27 3 Introduction to cocomplete tensor categories 36 3.1 Definitions and examples . 36 3.2 Categorification . 43 3.3 Element notation . 46 3.4 Adjunction between stacks and cocomplete tensor categories . 49 4 Commutative algebra in a cocomplete tensor category 53 4.1 Algebras and modules . 53 4.2 Ideals and affine schemes .
  • Introduction to Categories

    Introduction to Categories

    6 Introduction to categories 6.1 The definition of a category We have now seen many examples of representation theories and of operations with representations (direct sum, tensor product, induction, restriction, reflection functors, etc.) A context in which one can systematically talk about this is provided by Category Theory. Category theory was founded by Saunders MacLane and Samuel Eilenberg around 1940. It is a fairly abstract theory which seemingly has no content, for which reason it was christened “abstract nonsense”. Nevertheless, it is a very flexible and powerful language, which has become totally indispensable in many areas of mathematics, such as algebraic geometry, topology, representation theory, and many others. We will now give a very short introduction to Category theory, highlighting its relevance to the topics in representation theory we have discussed. For a serious acquaintance with category theory, the reader should use the classical book [McL]. Definition 6.1. A category is the following data: C (i) a class of objects Ob( ); C (ii) for every objects X; Y Ob( ), the class Hom (X; Y ) = Hom(X; Y ) of morphisms (or 2 C C arrows) from X; Y (for f Hom(X; Y ), one may write f : X Y ); 2 ! (iii) For any objects X; Y; Z Ob( ), a composition map Hom(Y; Z) Hom(X; Y ) Hom(X; Z), 2 C × ! (f; g) f g, 7! ∞ which satisfy the following axioms: 1. The composition is associative, i.e., (f g) h = f (g h); ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ 2. For each X Ob( ), there is a morphism 1 Hom(X; X), called the unit morphism, such 2 C X 2 that 1 f = f and g 1 = g for any f; g for which compositions make sense.
  • Bimodule Categories and Monoidal 2-Structure Justin Greenough University of New Hampshire, Durham

    Bimodule Categories and Monoidal 2-Structure Justin Greenough University of New Hampshire, Durham

    University of New Hampshire University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository Doctoral Dissertations Student Scholarship Fall 2010 Bimodule categories and monoidal 2-structure Justin Greenough University of New Hampshire, Durham Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.unh.edu/dissertation Recommended Citation Greenough, Justin, "Bimodule categories and monoidal 2-structure" (2010). Doctoral Dissertations. 532. https://scholars.unh.edu/dissertation/532 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Scholarship at University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BIMODULE CATEGORIES AND MONOIDAL 2-STRUCTURE BY JUSTIN GREENOUGH B.S., University of Alaska, Anchorage, 2003 M.S., University of New Hampshire, 2008 DISSERTATION Submitted to the University of New Hampshire in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Mathematics September, 2010 UMI Number: 3430786 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. UMT Dissertation Publishing UMI 3430786 Copyright 2010 by ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This edition of the work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 This thesis has been examined and approved.
  • A Topos-Theoretic View of Difference Algebra

    A Topos-Theoretic View of Difference Algebra

    A topos-theoretic view of difference algebra Ivan Tomašic´ Queen Mary University of London Workshop on Model Theory, Differential/Difference Algebra and Applications, CUNY/Courant, 12/03/2019 1 / 34 Outline Difference categories Cohomology in difference algebra Difference algebraic geometry Cohomology of difference algebraic groups 2 / 34 Difference categories: Ritt-style Let C be a category. Define its associated difference category σ-C I objects are pairs (X; σX ); where X 2 C , σX 2 C (X; X); I a morphism f :(X; σX ) ! (Y; σY ) is a commutative diagram in C f X Y σX σY f X Y i.e., an f 2 C (X; Y ) such that f ◦ σX = σY ◦ f: 3 / 34 Difference categories as functor categories Let σ be the category associated with the monoid N: I single object o; I Hom(o; o) ' N. Then σ-C ' [σ; C ]; the functor category: I objects are functors X : σ ! C I morphisms are natural transformations. Translation mechanism: if X 2 [σ; C ], then 1 (X (o); X (o −! o)) 2 σ-C : 4 / 34 Difference categories via categorical logic Let S be the algebraic theory of a single endomorphism. Then σ-C = S(C ); the category of models of S in C . 5 / 34 Examples We will consider: I σ-Set; I σ-Gr; I σ-Ab; I σ-Rng. Given R 2 σ-Rng, consider I R-Mod, the category of difference R-modules. 6 / 34 In search of difference cohomology: path to enlightenment Goals I Homological algebra of σ-Ab and R-Mod, for R 2 σ-Rng.
  • Modules Over Coproducts of Rings 3

    Modules Over Coproducts of Rings 3

    TRANSACTIONS OF THE AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY Volume 200, 1974 MODULESOVER COPRODUCTSOF RINGS BY GEORGE M. BERGMAN (1) ABSTRACT. Let Rq be a skew field, or more generally, a finite product of full matrix rings over skew fields. Let (R\)\<=\ be a family of faithful Rq- rings (associative unitary rings containing Rq) and let R denote the coproduct ("free product") of the R^ as i?Q-rings. An easy way to obtain an .R-module M is to choose for each A 6EA U {o} an R^-module Af^, and put M = (pJlí^Sj;, J!. Such an M will be called a "standard" i?-module. (Note that these include the free .R-modules.) We obtain results on the structure of standard ß-modules and homomor- phisms between them, and hence on the homological properties of R. In particular: (1) Every submodule of a standard module is isomorphic to a standard module. (2) If M and N are standard modules, we obtain simple criteria, in terms of the original modules M^, N^, for TV to be a homomorphic image of Af, respectively isomorphic to a direct summand of Af, respectively isomor- phic to Af. (3) We find that r gl dim R = supA (r gl dim i?^) if this is > 0, and % 0 or 1 in the remaining case. In §2 below we shall state our main results, Theorems2.2 and 2.3, and derive a large number of consequences. In §§3—8 we prove these theorems, assuming, *o avoid distractions, that R0 is a skew field. Afterward (§§9, 10) we in- dicate how to adapt the proofs to the case of RQ a finite direct product of full matrix rings over skew fields, examine some simple examples (§12), and discuss possible generalizations of our results (§§11, 13—15).