Example on Triangular Rings - Lam, Example 1.14

In summary, the conversation is discussing Example 1.14 from T. Y. Lam's book, "A First Course in Noncommutative Rings" (Second Edition). The example involves a matrix representation of a ring with a bimodule. The conversation delves into understanding the multiplication in this matrix representation and how it relates to the properties of the bimodule. Deveno explains the concept of interpreting the elements of the ring and bimodule as matrices and how this leads to a mnemonic SCHEMATIC for understanding the multiplication. Peter expresses his gratitude for the help and continues to work through Deveno's explanation.
  • #1
Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
3,998
48
I am reading T. Y. Lam's book, "A First Course in Noncommutative Rings" (Second Edition) and am currently focussed on Section 1:Basic Terminology and Examples ...

I need help with an aspect of Example 1.14 ... ...

Example 1.14 reads as follows: https://www.physicsforums.com/attachments/5984
https://www.physicsforums.com/attachments/5985I cannot follow why the results in Table 1.16 follow ...

For example, according to Table 1.16 ...

\(\displaystyle mr = 0\) for all \(\displaystyle m \in M\) and \(\displaystyle r \in R\) ... but why

Similarly I don't follow the other entries in the Table ...

Can someone please help ...

Peter
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
We have:

$\begin{pmatrix}0&m\\0&0\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}r&0\\0&0\end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix}0&0\\0&0\end{pmatrix}$
 
  • #3
Deveno said:
We have:

$\begin{pmatrix}0&m\\0&0\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}r&0\\0&0\end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix}0&0\\0&0\end{pmatrix}$
Hi Deveno,

Thanks for the help ... but I do not follow you ...

We have \(\displaystyle A = \begin{pmatrix} R & M \\ 0 & S \end{pmatrix}\)

where I have been thinking that \(\displaystyle M\) and \(\displaystyle R\) are a set of elements (actually a bimodule and left \(\displaystyle R\)-module) that we select elements from ... and then multiply ... that is, M and R are sets not actually matrices themselves ...

... ... BUT ... you seem to have interpreted \(\displaystyle M\) and \(\displaystyle R\) as matrices ... so you select \(\displaystyle m\) from \(\displaystyle M\) and \(\displaystyle r\) from \(\displaystyle R\) and write:

\(\displaystyle mr = \begin{pmatrix} 0 & m \\ 0 & 0 \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix} r & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \end{pmatrix}\) ...

I do not understand how \(\displaystyle MR\) in the table becomes a matrix multiplication ...Can you please clarify ...?

Peter
 
  • #4
Peter said:
Hi Deveno,

Thanks for the help ... but I do not follow you ...

We have \(\displaystyle A = \begin{pmatrix} R & M \\ 0 & S \end{pmatrix}\)

where I have been thinking that \(\displaystyle M\) and \(\displaystyle R\) are a set of elements (actually a bimodule and left \(\displaystyle R\)-module) that we select elements from ... and then multiply ... that is, M and R are sets not actually matrices themselves ...

... ... BUT ... you seem to have interpreted \(\displaystyle M\) and \(\displaystyle R\) as matrices ... so you select \(\displaystyle m\) from \(\displaystyle M\) and \(\displaystyle r\) from \(\displaystyle R\) and write:

\(\displaystyle mr = \begin{pmatrix} 0 & m \\ 0 & 0 \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix} r & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \end{pmatrix}\) ...

I do not understand how \(\displaystyle MR\) in the table becomes a matrix multiplication ...Can you please clarify ...?

Peter

$R$ is a ring, $S$ is a ring, and $M$ is an $(R,S)$-bimodule. A typical element of $A$ is:

$\begin{pmatrix}r&m\\0&s\end{pmatrix}$ with $r\in R, m\in M$, and $s\in S$.

We have an isomorphism (of abelian groups): $A \to R \oplus M \oplus S$ given by:

$\begin{pmatrix}r&m\\0&s\end{pmatrix} \mapsto (r,m,s)$.

We can thus regard our matrices as $\Bbb Z$-linear combinations of $(r,0,0),(0,m,0)$ and $(0,0,s)$ or equivalently as $\Bbb Z$-linear combinations of the matrices:

$\begin{pmatrix}r&0\\0&0\end{pmatrix}, \begin{pmatrix}0&m\\0&0\end{pmatrix}, \begin{pmatrix}0&0\\0&s\end{pmatrix}$

Formally, then, using the distributive law of matrices, we have:

$(r,m,s)(r',m',s') = [(r,0,0) + (0,m,0) + (0,0,s)][(r',0,0) + (0,m'0) + (0,0,s')]$

$=(r,0,0)(r',0,0) + (r,0,0)(0,m',0) + (r,0,0)(0,0,s') + (0,m,0)(r',0,0) + (0,m,0)(0,m',0) + (0,m,0)(0,0,s') + (0,0,s)(r',0,0) + (0,0,s)(0,m',0) + (0,0,s)(0,0,s')$

so in order to completely determine the multiplication in $A$, we need to know what these 9 terms are. The 3x3 table is a mnemonic SCHEMATIC, to remember which abelian subgroup ($R,M$ or $S$) each term is.

Note that the $1,2$ entry in the matrix is: $rm' + ms'$, which is in $M$ since $M$ is an $(R,S)$-bimodule.

That is, $RM \subseteq M$, and $MS \subseteq M$, as (left or right) scalar product sets; for example:

$RM = \{rm\mid r\in R, M \in M\} \subseteq M$, since $M$ is a (left) $R$-module.
 
  • #5
Deveno said:
$R$ is a ring, $S$ is a ring, and $M$ is an $(R,S)$-bimodule. A typical element of $A$ is:

$\begin{pmatrix}r&m\\0&s\end{pmatrix}$ with $r\in R, m\in M$, and $s\in S$.

We have an isomorphism (of abelian groups): $A \to R \oplus M \oplus S$ given by:

$\begin{pmatrix}r&m\\0&s\end{pmatrix} \mapsto (r,m,s)$.

We can thus regard our matrices as $\Bbb Z$-linear combinations of $(r,0,0),(0,m,0)$ and $(0,0,s)$ or equivalently as $\Bbb Z$-linear combinations of the matrices:

$\begin{pmatrix}r&0\\0&0\end{pmatrix}, \begin{pmatrix}0&m\\0&0\end{pmatrix}, \begin{pmatrix}0&0\\0&s\end{pmatrix}$

Formally, then, using the distributive law of matrices, we have:

$(r,m,s)(r',m',s') = [(r,0,0) + (0,m,0) + (0,0,s)][(r',0,0) + (0,m'0) + (0,0,s')]$

$=(r,0,0)(r',0,0) + (r,0,0)(0,m',0) + (r,0,0)(0,0,s') + (0,m,0)(r',0,0) + (0,m,0)(0,m',0) + (0,m,0)(0,0,s') + (0,0,s)(r',0,0) + (0,0,s)(0,m',0) + (0,0,s)(0,0,s')$

so in order to completely determine the multiplication in $A$, we need to know what these 9 terms are. The 3x3 table is a mnemonic SCHEMATIC, to remember which abelian subgroup ($R,M$ or $S$) each term is.

Note that the $1,2$ entry in the matrix is: $rm' + ms'$, which is in $M$ since $M$ is an $(R,S)$-bimodule.

That is, $RM \subseteq M$, and $MS \subseteq M$, as (left or right) scalar product sets; for example:

$RM = \{rm\mid r\in R, M \in M\} \subseteq M$, since $M$ is a (left) $R$-module.
Thanks for for the help, Deveno ...

Just working through your post and reflecting on what you have said ...

Thanks again ...

Peter
 

FAQ: Example on Triangular Rings - Lam, Example 1.14

What is the purpose of "Example on Triangular Rings - Lam, Example 1.14"?

The purpose of this example is to demonstrate the use of triangular rings in mathematics, specifically in the context of linear algebra.

What is a triangular ring?

A triangular ring is a type of algebraic structure that combines the properties of both a ring and a triangular matrix. It is a set of elements with two binary operations (usually addition and multiplication) that follow certain rules and properties.

What does "Lam, Example 1.14" refer to?

"Lam" refers to the author of the example, T.Y. Lam, who is a mathematician and author of several books on algebra. "Example 1.14" refers to the specific example within his book, "A First Course in Noncommutative Rings".

What concepts are covered in this example?

This example covers the concepts of triangular rings, subrings, and ideals in the context of linear algebra. It also illustrates how to perform operations such as addition, multiplication, and inversion in a triangular ring.

How is this example relevant to real-world applications?

Triangular rings have various applications in fields such as physics, computer science, and engineering. They are used to model linear transformations, solve systems of linear equations, and analyze networks and circuits. Additionally, the study of triangular rings has led to advancements in abstract algebra and group theory.

Back
Top