DOCSLIB.ORG

Polynomial Rings and Their Automorphisms

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Polynomial Rings and Their Automorphisms Polynomial rings and their automorphisms Vipul Naik A crash course in ring theory The polynomial Polynomial rings and their automorphisms ring Automorphisms and endomorphisms The notions of Vipul Naik invariant subring Some questions about the invariant subring More invariant April 23, 2007 subrings Further connections A summary Polynomial rings Outline and their automorphisms A crash course in ring theory Vipul Naik Definition of ring Modules over rings Generating sets and bases A crash course in Rings and ideals ring theory Concept of subring Definition of ring Modules over rings The polynomial ring Generating sets and The polynomial ring in one variable bases The polynomial ring in many variables Rings and ideals Concept of subring Automorphisms and endomorphisms The polynomial Homomorphism of rings ring Homomorphisms from the polynomial ring Linear and affine endomorphisms Automorphisms and The notions of invariant subring endomorphisms The fixed-point relationship The notions of Some questions about the invariant subring invariant subring Representations and faithful representations Generating sets and questions Some questions about the invariant More invariant subrings subring The orthogonal group Relation between invariant polynomials and vanishing sets More invariant subrings Further connections The module of covariants Further Harmonic polynomials and the Laplacian connections A summary A summary I (R, ∗) forms a semigroup (that is, ∗ is an associative binary operation) I The following distributivity laws hold: a ∗ (b + c) = (a ∗ b) + (a ∗ c) (a + b) ∗ c = (a ∗ c) + (b ∗ c) The identity element for addition is denoted as 0 and the inverse operation is denoted by the prefix unary −. Polynomial rings What’s a ring and their automorphisms Vipul Naik A ring is a set R equipped with two binary operations + A crash course in ring theory (addition) and ∗ (multiplication) such that: Definition of ring Modules over rings Generating sets and I (R, +) forms an Abelian group bases Rings and ideals Concept of subring The polynomial ring Automorphisms and endomorphisms The notions of invariant subring Some questions about the invariant subring More invariant subrings Further connections A summary I The following distributivity laws hold: a ∗ (b + c) = (a ∗ b) + (a ∗ c) (a + b) ∗ c = (a ∗ c) + (b ∗ c) The identity element for addition is denoted as 0 and the inverse operation is denoted by the prefix unary −. Polynomial rings What’s a ring and their automorphisms Vipul Naik A ring is a set R equipped with two binary operations + A crash course in ring theory (addition) and ∗ (multiplication) such that: Definition of ring Modules over rings Generating sets and I (R, +) forms an Abelian group bases Rings and ideals I (R, ∗) forms a semigroup (that is, ∗ is an associative Concept of subring The polynomial binary operation) ring Automorphisms and endomorphisms The notions of invariant subring Some questions about the invariant subring More invariant subrings Further connections A summary Polynomial rings What’s a ring and their automorphisms Vipul Naik A ring is a set R equipped with two binary operations + A crash course in ring theory (addition) and ∗ (multiplication) such that: Definition of ring Modules over rings Generating sets and I (R, +) forms an Abelian group bases Rings and ideals I (R, ∗) forms a semigroup (that is, ∗ is an associative Concept of subring The polynomial binary operation) ring The following distributivity laws hold: Automorphisms I and endomorphisms The notions of a ∗ (b + c) = (a ∗ b) + (a ∗ c) invariant subring Some questions about the invariant (a + b) ∗ c = (a ∗ c) + (b ∗ c) subring More invariant The identity element for addition is denoted as 0 and the subrings inverse operation is denoted by the prefix unary −. Further connections A summary In other words, the multiplication operation is a monoid operation. Note that in any ring, a ∗ 0 = 0 for all a. Hence, a ring with 1 = 0 must be the trivial ring. Polynomial rings Ring with identity and their automorphisms Vipul Naik A crash course in ring theory A ring with identity is a ring for which the multiplication Definition of ring Modules over rings Generating sets and operation has an identity element, that is, there exists an bases Rings and ideals element 1 ∈ R such that: Concept of subring The polynomial a ∗ 1 = 1 ∗ a = a ∀ a ∈ R ring Automorphisms and endomorphisms The notions of invariant subring Some questions about the invariant subring More invariant subrings Further connections A summary Note that in any ring, a ∗ 0 = 0 for all a. Hence, a ring with 1 = 0 must be the trivial ring. Polynomial rings Ring with identity and their automorphisms Vipul Naik A crash course in ring theory A ring with identity is a ring for which the multiplication Definition of ring Modules over rings Generating sets and operation has an identity element, that is, there exists an bases Rings and ideals element 1 ∈ R such that: Concept of subring The polynomial a ∗ 1 = 1 ∗ a = a ∀ a ∈ R ring Automorphisms and endomorphisms In other words, the multiplication operation is a monoid The notions of invariant subring operation. Some questions about the invariant subring More invariant subrings Further connections A summary Polynomial rings Ring with identity and their automorphisms Vipul Naik A crash course in ring theory A ring with identity is a ring for which the multiplication Definition of ring Modules over rings Generating sets and operation has an identity element, that is, there exists an bases Rings and ideals element 1 ∈ R such that: Concept of subring The polynomial a ∗ 1 = 1 ∗ a = a ∀ a ∈ R ring Automorphisms and endomorphisms In other words, the multiplication operation is a monoid The notions of invariant subring operation. Some questions Note that in any ring, a ∗ 0 = 0 for all a. Hence, a ring with about the invariant subring 1 = 0 must be the trivial ring. More invariant subrings Further connections A summary All the rings we shall be looking at today are so-called commutative rings with identity, viz ∗ is commutative and also has an identity element. Polynomial rings Commutative ring and their automorphisms Vipul Naik A crash course in ring theory Definition of ring Modules over rings Generating sets and bases Rings and ideals A ring is said to be commutative if the multiplicative Concept of subring operation ∗ is commutative. The polynomial ring Automorphisms and endomorphisms The notions of invariant subring Some questions about the invariant subring More invariant subrings Further connections A summary Polynomial rings Commutative ring and their automorphisms Vipul Naik A crash course in ring theory Definition of ring Modules over rings Generating sets and bases Rings and ideals A ring is said to be commutative if the multiplicative Concept of subring operation ∗ is commutative. The polynomial ring All the rings we shall be looking at today are so-called Automorphisms and commutative rings with identity, viz ∗ is commutative and endomorphisms also has an identity element. The notions of invariant subring Some questions about the invariant subring More invariant subrings Further connections A summary I We assume multiplication takes higher precedence over addition. This helps us leave out a number of parentheses. For instance, (a ∗ b) + (c ∗ d) can be written simply as ab + cd I Parentheses are also dropped from repeated addition I We denote by n ∈ N the number 1 + 1 + 1 ... 1 where we add 1 to itself n times. Moreover, we denote by nx the number x + x + ... + x (even when there doesn’t exist any 1) The first of these conventions is justified by associativity of multiplication, the second one is justified by the distributivity law. Polynomial rings Conventions followed while writing expressions in and their automorphisms a ring Vipul Naik We generally adopt the following conventions: A crash course in ring theory I The multiplication symbol, as well as parentheses for Definition of ring Modules over rings multiplication, are usually omitted. Thus, a ∗ (b ∗ c) Generating sets and bases may be simply written as abc Rings and ideals Concept of subring The polynomial ring Automorphisms and endomorphisms The notions of invariant subring Some questions about the invariant subring More invariant subrings Further connections A summary I Parentheses are also dropped from repeated addition I We denote by n ∈ N the number 1 + 1 + 1 ... 1 where we add 1 to itself n times. Moreover, we denote by nx the number x + x + ... + x (even when there doesn’t exist any 1) The first of these conventions is justified by associativity of multiplication, the second one is justified by the distributivity law. Polynomial rings Conventions followed while writing expressions in and their automorphisms a ring Vipul Naik We generally adopt the following conventions: A crash course in ring theory I The multiplication symbol, as well as parentheses for Definition of ring Modules over rings multiplication, are usually omitted. Thus, a ∗ (b ∗ c) Generating sets and bases may be simply written as abc Rings and ideals We assume multiplication takes higher precedence over Concept of subring I The polynomial addition. This helps us leave out a number of ring Automorphisms parentheses. For instance, (a ∗ b) + (c ∗ d) can be and written simply as ab + cd endomorphisms The notions of invariant subring Some questions about the invariant subring More invariant subrings Further connections A summary I We denote by n ∈ N the number 1 + 1 + 1 ... 1 where we add 1 to itself n times. Moreover, we denote by nx the number x + x + ... + x (even when there doesn’t exist any 1) The first of these conventions is justified by associativity of multiplication, the second one is justified by the distributivity law. Polynomial rings Conventions followed while writing expressions in and their automorphisms a ring Vipul Naik We generally adopt the following conventions: A crash course in ring theory I The multiplication symbol, as well as parentheses for Definition of ring Modules over rings multiplication, are usually omitted.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Subset Semirings
    University of New Mexico UNM Digital Repository Faculty and Staff Publications Mathematics 2013 Subset Semirings Florentin Smarandache University of New Mexico, [email protected] W.B. Vasantha Kandasamy [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/math_fsp Part of the Algebraic Geometry Commons, Analysis Commons, and the Other Mathematics Commons Recommended Citation W.B. Vasantha Kandasamy & F. Smarandache. Subset Semirings. Ohio: Educational Publishing, 2013. This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Mathematics at UNM Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty and Staff Publications by an authorized administrator of UNM Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]. Subset Semirings W. B. Vasantha Kandasamy Florentin Smarandache Educational Publisher Inc. Ohio 2013 This book can be ordered from: Education Publisher Inc. 1313 Chesapeake Ave. Columbus, Ohio 43212, USA Toll Free: 1-866-880-5373 Copyright 2013 by Educational Publisher Inc. and the Authors Peer reviewers: Marius Coman, researcher, Bucharest, Romania. Dr. Arsham Borumand Saeid, University of Kerman, Iran. Said Broumi, University of Hassan II Mohammedia, Casablanca, Morocco. Dr. Stefan Vladutescu, University of Craiova, Romania. Many books can be downloaded from the following Digital Library of Science: http://www.gallup.unm.edu/eBooks-otherformats.htm ISBN-13: 978-1-59973-234-3 EAN: 9781599732343 Printed in the United States of America 2 CONTENTS Preface 5 Chapter One INTRODUCTION 7 Chapter Two SUBSET SEMIRINGS OF TYPE I 9 Chapter Three SUBSET SEMIRINGS OF TYPE II 107 Chapter Four NEW SUBSET SPECIAL TYPE OF TOPOLOGICAL SPACES 189 3 FURTHER READING 255 INDEX 258 ABOUT THE AUTHORS 260 4 PREFACE In this book authors study the new notion of the algebraic structure of the subset semirings using the subsets of rings or semirings.
    [Show full text]
  • Exercises and Solutions in Groups Rings and Fields
    EXERCISES AND SOLUTIONS IN GROUPS RINGS AND FIELDS Mahmut Kuzucuo˘glu Middle East Technical University [email protected] Ankara, TURKEY April 18, 2012 ii iii TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTERS 0. PREFACE . v 1. SETS, INTEGERS, FUNCTIONS . 1 2. GROUPS . 4 3. RINGS . .55 4. FIELDS . 77 5. INDEX . 100 iv v Preface These notes are prepared in 1991 when we gave the abstract al- gebra course. Our intention was to help the students by giving them some exercises and get them familiar with some solutions. Some of the solutions here are very short and in the form of a hint. I would like to thank B¨ulent B¨uy¨ukbozkırlı for his help during the preparation of these notes. I would like to thank also Prof. Ismail_ S¸. G¨ulo˘glufor checking some of the solutions. Of course the remaining errors belongs to me. If you find any errors, I should be grateful to hear from you. Finally I would like to thank Aynur Bora and G¨uldaneG¨um¨u¸sfor their typing the manuscript in LATEX. Mahmut Kuzucuo˘glu I would like to thank our graduate students Tu˘gbaAslan, B¨u¸sra C¸ınar, Fuat Erdem and Irfan_ Kadık¨oyl¨ufor reading the old version and pointing out some misprints. With their encouragement I have made the changes in the shape, namely I put the answers right after the questions. 20, December 2011 vi M. Kuzucuo˘glu 1. SETS, INTEGERS, FUNCTIONS 1.1. If A is a finite set having n elements, prove that A has exactly 2n distinct subsets.
    [Show full text]
  • Formal Power Series - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
    Formal power series - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_power_series Formal power series From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia In mathematics, formal power series are a generalization of polynomials as formal objects, where the number of terms is allowed to be infinite; this implies giving up the possibility to substitute arbitrary values for indeterminates. This perspective contrasts with that of power series, whose variables designate numerical values, and which series therefore only have a definite value if convergence can be established. Formal power series are often used merely to represent the whole collection of their coefficients. In combinatorics, they provide representations of numerical sequences and of multisets, and for instance allow giving concise expressions for recursively defined sequences regardless of whether the recursion can be explicitly solved; this is known as the method of generating functions. Contents 1 Introduction 2 The ring of formal power series 2.1 Definition of the formal power series ring 2.1.1 Ring structure 2.1.2 Topological structure 2.1.3 Alternative topologies 2.2 Universal property 3 Operations on formal power series 3.1 Multiplying series 3.2 Power series raised to powers 3.3 Inverting series 3.4 Dividing series 3.5 Extracting coefficients 3.6 Composition of series 3.6.1 Example 3.7 Composition inverse 3.8 Formal differentiation of series 4 Properties 4.1 Algebraic properties of the formal power series ring 4.2 Topological properties of the formal power series
    [Show full text]
  • Dynamic Algebras: Examples, Constructions, Applications
    Dynamic Algebras: Examples, Constructions, Applications Vaughan Pratt∗ Dept. of Computer Science, Stanford, CA 94305 Abstract Dynamic algebras combine the classes of Boolean (B ∨ 0 0) and regu- lar (R ∪ ; ∗) algebras into a single finitely axiomatized variety (BR 3) resembling an R-module with “scalar” multiplication 3. The basic result is that ∗ is reflexive transitive closure, contrary to the intuition that this concept should require quantifiers for its definition. Using this result we give several examples of dynamic algebras arising naturally in connection with additive functions, binary relations, state trajectories, languages, and flowcharts. The main result is that free dynamic algebras are residu- ally finite (i.e. factor as a subdirect product of finite dynamic algebras), important because finite separable dynamic algebras are isomorphic to Kripke structures. Applications include a new completeness proof for the Segerberg axiomatization of propositional dynamic logic, and yet another notion of regular algebra. Key words: Dynamic algebra, logic, program verification, regular algebra. This paper originally appeared as Technical Memo #138, Laboratory for Computer Science, MIT, July 1979, and was subsequently revised, shortened, retitled, and published as [Pra80b]. After more than a decade of armtwisting I. N´emeti and H. Andr´eka finally persuaded the author to publish TM#138 itself on the ground that it contained a substantial body of interesting material that for the sake of brevity had been deleted from the STOC-80 version. The principal changes here to TM#138 are the addition of footnotes and the sections at the end on retrospective citations and reflections. ∗This research was supported by the National Science Foundation under NSF grant no.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to the P-Adic Space
    Introduction to the p-adic Space Joel P. Abraham October 25, 2017 1 Introduction From a young age, students learn fundamental operations with the real numbers: addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, etc. We intuitively understand that distance under the reals as the absolute value function, even though we never have had a fundamental introduction to set theory or number theory. As such, I found this topic to be extremely captivating, since it almost entirely reverses the intuitive notion of distance in the reals. Such a small modification to the definition of distance gives rise to a completely different set of numbers under which the typical axioms are false. Furthermore, this is particularly interesting since the p-adic system commonly appears in natural phenomena. Due to the versatility of this metric space, and its interesting uniqueness, I find the p-adic space a truly fascinating development in algebraic number theory, and thus chose to explore it further. 2 The p-adic Metric Space 2.1 p-adic Norm Definition 2.1. A metric space is a set with a distance function or metric, d(p, q) defined over the elements of the set and mapping them to a real number, satisfying: arXiv:1710.08835v1 [math.HO] 22 Oct 2017 (a) d(p, q) > 0 if p = q 6 (b) d(p,p)=0 (c) d(p, q)= d(q,p) (d) d(p, q) d(p, r)+ d(r, q) ≤ The real numbers clearly form a metric space with the absolute value function as the norm such that for p, q R ∈ d(p, q)= p q .
    [Show full text]
  • Discriminants and the Monoid of Quadratic Rings
    DISCRIMINANTS AND THE MONOID OF QUADRATIC RINGS JOHN VOIGHT Abstract. We consider the natural monoid structure on the set of quadratic rings over an arbitrary base scheme and characterize this monoid in terms of discriminants. Quadratic field extensions K of Q are characterized by their discriminants. Indeed, there is a bijection 8Separable quadratic9 < = ∼ × ×2 algebras over Q −! Q =Q : up to isomorphism ; p 2 ×2 Q[ d] = Q[x]=(x − d) 7! dQ wherep a separable quadratic algebra over Q is either a quadratic field extension or the algebra Q[ 1] ' Q × Q of discriminant 1. In particular, the set of isomorphism classes of separable quadratic extensions of Q can be given the structure of an elementary abelian 2-group, with identity element the class of Q × Q: we have simply p p p Q[ d1] ∗ Q[ d2] = Q[ d1d2] p × ×2 up to isomorphism. If d1; d2; dp1d2 2pQ n Q then Q( d1d2) sits as the third quadratic subfield of the compositum Q( d1; d2): p p Q( d1; d2) p p p Q( d1) Q( d1d2) Q( d2) Q p Indeed, ifpσ1 isp the nontrivial elementp of Gal(Q( d1)=Q), then therep is a unique extension of σ1 to Q( d1; d2) leaving Q( d2) fixed, similarly with σ2, and Q( d1d2) is the fixed field of the composition σ1σ2 = σ2σ1. This characterization of quadratic extensions works over any base field F with char F 6= 2 and is summarized concisely in the Kummer theory isomorphism H1(Gal(F =F ); {±1g) = Hom(Gal(F =F ); {±1g) ' F ×=F ×2: On the other hand, over a field F with char F = 2, all separable quadratic extensions have trivial discriminant and instead they are classified by the (additive) Artin-Schreier group F=}(F ) where }(F ) = fr + r2 : r 2 F g Date: January 17, 2021.
    [Show full text]
  • SEMIFIELDS from SKEW POLYNOMIAL RINGS 1. INTRODUCTION a Semifield Is a Division Algebra, Where Multiplication Is Not Necessarily
    SEMIFIELDS FROM SKEW POLYNOMIAL RINGS MICHEL LAVRAUW AND JOHN SHEEKEY Abstract. Skew polynomial rings were used to construct finite semifields by Petit in [20], following from a construction of Ore and Jacobson of associative division algebras. Johnson and Jha [10] later constructed the so-called cyclic semifields, obtained using irreducible semilinear transformations. In this work we show that these two constructions in fact lead to isotopic semifields, show how the skew polynomial construction can be used to calculate the nuclei more easily, and provide an upper bound for the number of isotopism classes, improving the bounds obtained by Kantor and Liebler in [13] and implicitly by Dempwolff in [2]. 1. INTRODUCTION A semifield is a division algebra, where multiplication is not necessarily associative. Finite nonassociative semifields of order q are known to exist for each prime power q = pn > 8, p prime, with n > 2. The study of semifields was initiated by Dickson in [4] and by now many constructions of semifields are known. We refer to the next section for more details. In 1933, Ore [19] introduced the concept of skew-polynomial rings R = K[t; σ], where K is a field, t an indeterminate, and σ an automorphism of K. These rings are associative, non-commutative, and are left- and right-Euclidean. Ore ([18], see also Jacobson [6]) noted that multiplication in R, modulo right division by an irreducible f contained in the centre of R, yields associative algebras without zero divisors. These algebras were called cyclic algebras. We show that the requirement of obtaining an associative algebra can be dropped, and this construction leads to nonassociative division algebras, i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Algebra + Homotopy = Operad
    Symplectic, Poisson and Noncommutative Geometry MSRI Publications Volume 62, 2014 Algebra + homotopy = operad BRUNO VALLETTE “If I could only understand the beautiful consequences following from the concise proposition d 2 0.” —Henri Cartan D This survey provides an elementary introduction to operads and to their ap- plications in homotopical algebra. The aim is to explain how the notion of an operad was prompted by the necessity to have an algebraic object which encodes higher homotopies. We try to show how universal this theory is by giving many applications in algebra, geometry, topology, and mathematical physics. (This text is accessible to any student knowing what tensor products, chain complexes, and categories are.) Introduction 229 1. When algebra meets homotopy 230 2. Operads 239 3. Operadic syzygies 253 4. Homotopy transfer theorem 272 Conclusion 283 Acknowledgements 284 References 284 Introduction Galois explained to us that operations acting on the solutions of algebraic equa- tions are mathematical objects as well. The notion of an operad was created in order to have a well defined mathematical object which encodes “operations”. Its name is a portemanteau word, coming from the contraction of the words “operations” and “monad”, because an operad can be defined as a monad encoding operations. The introduction of this notion was prompted in the 60’s, by the necessity of working with higher operations made up of higher homotopies appearing in algebraic topology. Algebra is the study of algebraic structures with respect to isomorphisms. Given two isomorphic vector spaces and one algebra structure on one of them, 229 230 BRUNO VALLETTE one can always define, by means of transfer, an algebra structure on the other space such that these two algebra structures become isomorphic.
    [Show full text]
  • On Minimally Free Algebras
    Can. J. Math., Vol. XXXVII, No. 5, 1985, pp. 963-978 ON MINIMALLY FREE ALGEBRAS PAUL BANKSTON AND RICHARD SCHUTT 1. Introduction. For us an "algebra" is a finitary "universal algebra" in the sense of G. Birkhoff [9]. We are concerned in this paper with algebras whose endomorphisms are determined by small subsets. For example, an algebra A is rigid (in the strong sense) if the only endomorphism on A is the identity id^. In this case, the empty set determines the endomorphism set E(A). We place the property of rigidity at the bottom rung of a cardinal-indexed ladder of properties as follows. Given a cardinal number K, an algebra .4 is minimally free over a set of cardinality K (K-free for short) if there is a subset X Q A of cardinality K such that every function f\X —-> A extends to a unique endomorphism <p e E(A). (It is clear that A is rigid if and only if A is 0-free.) Members of X will be called counters; and we will be interested in how badly counters can fail to generate the algebra. The property "«-free" is a solipsistic version of "free on K generators" in the sense that A has this property if and only if A is free over a set of cardinality K relative to the concrete category whose sole object is A and whose morphisms are the endomorphisms of A (thus explaining the use of the adverb "minimally" above). In view of this we see that the free algebras on K generators relative to any variety give us examples of "small" K-free algebras.
    [Show full text]
  • 5. Polynomial Rings Let R Be a Commutative Ring. a Polynomial of Degree N in an Indeterminate (Or Variable) X with Coefficients
    5. polynomial rings Let R be a commutative ring. A polynomial of degree n in an indeterminate (or variable) x with coefficients in R is an expression of the form f = f(x)=a + a x + + a xn, 0 1 ··· n where a0, ,an R and an =0.Wesaythata0, ,an are the coefficients of f and n ··· ∈ ̸ ··· that anx is the highest degree term of f. A polynomial is determined by its coeffiecients. m i n i Two polynomials f = i=0 aix and g = i=1 bix are equal if m = n and ai = bi for i =0, 1, ,n. ! ! Degree··· of a polynomial is a non-negative integer. The polynomials of degree zero are just the elements of R, these are called constant polynomials, or simply constants. Let R[x] denote the set of all polynomials in the variable x with coefficients in R. The addition and 2 multiplication of polynomials are defined in the usual manner: If f(x)=a0 + a1x + a2x + a x3 + and g(x)=b + b x + b x2 + b x3 + are two elements of R[x], then their sum is 3 ··· 0 1 2 3 ··· f(x)+g(x)=(a + b )+(a + b )x +(a + b )x2 +(a + b )x3 + 0 0 1 1 2 2 3 3 ··· and their product is defined by f(x) g(x)=a b +(a b + a b )x +(a b + a b + a b )x2 +(a b + a b + a b + a b )x3 + · 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 1 1 2 0 0 3 1 2 2 1 3 0 ··· Let 1 denote the constant polynomial 1 and 0 denote the constant polynomial zero.
    [Show full text]
  • Notes on Ring Theory
    Notes on Ring Theory by Avinash Sathaye, Professor of Mathematics February 1, 2007 Contents 1 1 Ring axioms and definitions. Definition: Ring We define a ring to be a non empty set R together with two binary operations f,g : R × R ⇒ R such that: 1. R is an abelian group under the operation f. 2. The operation g is associative, i.e. g(g(x, y),z)=g(x, g(y,z)) for all x, y, z ∈ R. 3. The operation g is distributive over f. This means: g(f(x, y),z)=f(g(x, z),g(y,z)) and g(x, f(y,z)) = f(g(x, y),g(x, z)) for all x, y, z ∈ R. Further we define the following natural concepts. 1. Definition: Commutative ring. If the operation g is also commu- tative, then we say that R is a commutative ring. 2. Definition: Ring with identity. If the operation g has a two sided identity then we call it the identity of the ring. If it exists, the ring is said to have an identity. 3. The zero ring. A trivial example of a ring consists of a single element x with both operations trivial. Such a ring leads to pathologies in many of the concepts discussed below and it is prudent to assume that our ring is not such a singleton ring. It is called the “zero ring”, since the unique element is denoted by 0 as per convention below. Warning: We shall always assume that our ring under discussion is not a zero ring.
    [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]