Why Use a - b Instead of a + b in Equivalence Classes of Rings?

InquilineKea
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
So I'm kind of confused about the definition:

a-b\in I

Why a - b instead of a + b?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you trying to prove that a-b is an equivalence relation? Can you be more specific?
 
Last edited:
It's actually natural to write a-b because I becomes zero when you quotient out by it, so a-b in I means a-b=0 or, written differently, a=b.
 
you would presumably want a equivalent to a, which follows from a-a in I, rather than a+a in I.
 
The world of 2\times 2 complex matrices is very colorful. They form a Banach-algebra, they act on spinors, they contain the quaternions, SU(2), su(2), SL(2,\mathbb C), sl(2,\mathbb C). Furthermore, with the determinant as Euclidean or pseudo-Euclidean norm, isu(2) is a 3-dimensional Euclidean space, \mathbb RI\oplus isu(2) is a Minkowski space with signature (1,3), i\mathbb RI\oplus su(2) is a Minkowski space with signature (3,1), SU(2) is the double cover of SO(3), sl(2,\mathbb C) is the...
Back
Top