Results 1 to 10 of 10

Math Help - Non-commutative ring

  1. #1
    Newbie
    Joined
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    22

    Non-commutative ring

    I have the non-commutative ring R which is

    <br />
\left[<br />
  \begin{array}{ c c }<br />
     \mathbb Z & \mathbb Q \\<br />
     0 & \mathbb Q<br />
  \end{array} \right]<br />

    How can I show that every right ideal in the ring R is projective and finitely generated. And how can I use this to show that the right global dimension of R is 1.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    MHF Contributor

    Joined
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    15,367
    Thanks
    1312
    Perhaps it would help if you explained what
    \left[\begin{array}{cc}\mathbb{R} & \mathbb{Q} \\ 0 & \mathbb{Q}\end{array}\right] means! What does it mean for a matrix to have sets of numbers as entries?
    Last edited by mr fantastic; March 21st 2009 at 01:06 PM. Reason: The matter I have deleted is being dealt with
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    Newbie
    Joined
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    22
    it mean that you have rational and integers instead of \mathbb Q and mathbb Z.
    and you add them as you add integers and same goes for multiplication.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  4. #4
    MHF Contributor

    Joined
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,295
    Thanks
    7
    you need to be reminded that creating multiple accounts is against this forum's rules! so, as a very mild punishment, you'll only get a partial help on this question!

    start with observing that the right ideals of your ring, which i'll call it R are exactly in this form: I_1=\begin{pmatrix}n \mathbb{Z} & \mathbb{Q} \\ 0 & \mathbb{Q} \end{pmatrix}, \ \ I_2 = \begin{pmatrix}n \mathbb{Z} & \mathbb{Q} \\ 0 & 0 \end{pmatrix}, \ \ I_V=\begin{pmatrix}0 & x \\ 0 & y \end{pmatrix}, where n \geq 1 is any integer and

    V=\{\begin{pmatrix}x \\ y \end{pmatrix}: \ \ \begin{pmatrix}0 & x \\ 0 & y \end{pmatrix} \in I_V \} is any \mathbb{Q} vector subspace of \mathbb{Q} \oplus \mathbb{Q} and therefore it's either 0, \ \mathbb{Q} \oplus \mathbb{Q} or isomorphic to \mathbb{Q}. also clearly I_1=nR \cong R, \ I_2=ne_{11}R, and I_1=I_2 \oplus e_{22}R,

    which proves that I_1,I_2 are finitely generated projective submodules of R. the case I_V is left for you.

    hence R is a right hereditary ring and therefore every submodule of a free R module has to be projective. so \text{r.gl.dim}(R) \leq 1. but R is not semisimple (why?) and thus \text{r.gl.dim}(R) \neq 0,

    which forces \text{r.gl.dim}(R) to be 1.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  5. #5
    Newbie
    Joined
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    22
    I think you should give me full help, because I dont have any other account on this forum.

    What about left ideals? How can I show that there are left ideals in R which are not projective and finitely generated, and how can I conclude that the left global dimension of R is >1.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  6. #6
    Flow Master
    mr fantastic's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2007
    From
    Zeitgeist
    Posts
    16,948
    Thanks
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by ZetaX View Post
    I think you should give me full help, because I dont have any other account on this forum.
    I think you should spend more than just 20 minutes thinking about what NonCommAlg has posted. What he has posted should give you enough to make progress. When/if you get stuck, you can then say specifically what you can't do.

    NB: NonCommAlg has given full help - he was making a joke with that comment. Unfortunately, what you seem to think is full help is getting the complete solution without having to apply any effort. What we think is full help is giving the student who is willing to think a good push in the right direction. Try to be a bit be more grateful - you are clearly in much better shape to answer the question than you were when you first posted it.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  7. #7
    Junior Member
    Joined
    Oct 2008
    From
    Guernsey
    Posts
    69
    Then why did peteryellow post the same question on a different forum?

    MathLinks :: View topic - non-commutative ring
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  8. #8
    Flow Master
    mr fantastic's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2007
    From
    Zeitgeist
    Posts
    16,948
    Thanks
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by SimonM View Post
    Then why did peteryellow post the same question on a different forum?

    MathLinks :: View topic - non-commutative ring
    There are clearly some off-topic things that need to be sorted out here. In the meantime, please keep all posts in this thread on-topic.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  9. #9
    Newbie
    Joined
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    22
    Thanks, non-commutative algebra for your help.

    I have some questions.

    What is e_11 and e_22?
    I can see that I_1 and I_2 are finitely generated but how do you get that they are projective?
    How do you know that R not semisimple implies that r.gl.dimR is different from 0.
    And how can I see that R is not semisimple.

    I know that R is right noetherian. Right? Can I use this to say something about that the ring R is not semisimple?
    Last edited by ZetaX; March 22nd 2009 at 02:11 AM.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  10. #10
    MHF Contributor

    Joined
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,295
    Thanks
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by ZetaX View Post
    Thanks, non-commutative algebra for your help.

    What is e_11 and e_22?
    e_{11}=\begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \end{pmatrix}, \ \ e_{22}=\begin{pmatrix}0 & 0 \\ 0 & 1 \end{pmatrix}.

    I can see that I_1 and I_2 are finitely generated but how do you get that they are projective?
    as i mentioned I_1 \cong R and so it's free and we know every free R-module is projective. also it's in my solution that I_2 is a direct summand of I_1, and we know that every direct summand of a

    projective module is projective.

    How do you know that R not semisimple implies that r.gl.dimR is different from 0.
    this is a very basic fact that a ring R is semisimple iff every (right) R-module is projective. thus a ring R is semisimple iff \text{pd.dim}(M)=0, for any R-module M, which is equivalent to say that

    \text{r.gl.dim}(R)=0 because \text{r.gl.dim}(R)=\text{sup} \{\text{pd}(M): \ \ M \ \text{is a right R module} \}. (similary for left global dimension)


    And how can I see that R is not semisimple.
    recall that the Jacobson radical of a semisimple ring is zero. but in our ring e_{12}=\begin{pmatrix}0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 \end{pmatrix} is in the Jacobson radical of R. the reason is that for any z \in R, the element 1-e_{12}z is easily

    seen to be invertible in R.


    Note: i won't answer any further questions about this problem anymore. your questions show that you even don't have the minimum background required for problems at this level.

    now it's time to get some sleep!
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. Commutative Ring
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: March 10th 2011, 08:47 AM
  2. Commutative Ring
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: February 22nd 2011, 11:38 AM
  3. Commutative ring
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: April 8th 2010, 07:05 AM
  4. Commutative Ring
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: November 24th 2009, 09:54 AM
  5. Commutative Ring
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: November 20th 2008, 11:51 AM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum