What are the left and right ideals of matrix ring? How about the two sided ideals?
What are the left and right ideals of matrix ring? How about the two sided ideals?
abstract-algebra ring-theory ideals
add a comment |
What are the left and right ideals of matrix ring? How about the two sided ideals?
abstract-algebra ring-theory ideals
1
Hint: as a left module over itself, the matrix ring decomposes into a direct sum of copies of the module of column vectors.
– Rasmus
Mar 13 '11 at 16:47
1
Concerning twosided ideals: try taking a non-zero matrix and multiply from the left and from the right with varius matrices. See what you can get this way.
– Rasmus
Mar 13 '11 at 16:48
add a comment |
What are the left and right ideals of matrix ring? How about the two sided ideals?
abstract-algebra ring-theory ideals
What are the left and right ideals of matrix ring? How about the two sided ideals?
abstract-algebra ring-theory ideals
abstract-algebra ring-theory ideals
edited Jan 17 '12 at 16:24
Martin Sleziak
44.7k7115270
44.7k7115270
asked Mar 13 '11 at 16:40
user8195
1
Hint: as a left module over itself, the matrix ring decomposes into a direct sum of copies of the module of column vectors.
– Rasmus
Mar 13 '11 at 16:47
1
Concerning twosided ideals: try taking a non-zero matrix and multiply from the left and from the right with varius matrices. See what you can get this way.
– Rasmus
Mar 13 '11 at 16:48
add a comment |
1
Hint: as a left module over itself, the matrix ring decomposes into a direct sum of copies of the module of column vectors.
– Rasmus
Mar 13 '11 at 16:47
1
Concerning twosided ideals: try taking a non-zero matrix and multiply from the left and from the right with varius matrices. See what you can get this way.
– Rasmus
Mar 13 '11 at 16:48
1
1
Hint: as a left module over itself, the matrix ring decomposes into a direct sum of copies of the module of column vectors.
– Rasmus
Mar 13 '11 at 16:47
Hint: as a left module over itself, the matrix ring decomposes into a direct sum of copies of the module of column vectors.
– Rasmus
Mar 13 '11 at 16:47
1
1
Concerning twosided ideals: try taking a non-zero matrix and multiply from the left and from the right with varius matrices. See what you can get this way.
– Rasmus
Mar 13 '11 at 16:48
Concerning twosided ideals: try taking a non-zero matrix and multiply from the left and from the right with varius matrices. See what you can get this way.
– Rasmus
Mar 13 '11 at 16:48
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
The left ideals of the matrix ring $S = M_n(R)$ over a (unital, associative) ring $R$ are in a $1–1$ correspondence with the left submodules of a free left $R$-module $R^n$ of rank $n$.
Given any left $R$-submodule $Kle R^n$ define the ideal $I(K)$ as those matrices whose rows are elements of $K$. If $M$ is such a matrix and $A$ is an arbitrary $ntimes n$ matrix over $R$, then $AM$ is a matrix whose rows are $R$-linear combinations of the rows of $M$, and so also contained in $K$. Similarly, by multiplying by elementary matrices (matrix units even), you get that every left ideal $I$ determines a submodule $K(I)$ consisting of the first rows of elements of the ideal. You then check that $I(K(I))=I$ and $K(I(K))=K$.
This is called Morita equivalence. The left ideal $P = I(Roplus0oplusdotsoplus 0) = I(Roplus 0^{n−1})$ is a direct summand of the left $S$-module $S$, and so is called a projective module. It is faithful, since $S simeq P^n$ as left $S$-modules. In other words, it is a progenerator. $I(K) = _SPotimes_R K$ and $K(I) = _Roperatorname{Hom}_S(P,I)$.
The short version is just that modules over $S$ are just big versions of modules over $R$. In particular, left ideals of $S$ are just left submodules of $R^n$.
Over some rings $R$, the submodules of $R^n$ can be significantly more complicated. Even for fields, the submodule lattice of $R=mathbb R$ is very simple: just $0 le R$. For $R^n$ one has the Grassmannian, which to my mind is quite a bit more complex than $R$. Other rings can be even worse, so one should be careful of leaning too heavily on the intuition for fields when dealing with matrix rings, though any Morita property will transfer between $R$ and $S$ without trouble using the "I()" and "K()" constructions.
add a comment |
For two-sided ideals, see the previous question which deals with fields. In the comments I state the description of ideals over a commutative ring with $1$: they are precisely the subrings that consist of matrices with coefficients in $mathcal{J}$, where $mathcal{J}$ is an ideal of $R$. The result for not-necessarily commutative rings is the obvious one. For rings without an identity, it gets a bit more complicated, but essentially the same kind of argument works.
For one-sided ideals, think about some of the argument given in the 2-sided case. You can do some of the stuff described, though perhaps not all. For instance, for left ideals, you can isolate rows. So perhaps you can modify the answer yoyo gives for the division ring case to a general case, along the same lines as the result for two-sided ideals generalizes from fields to the general case.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f26726%2fwhat-are-the-left-and-right-ideals-of-matrix-ring-how-about-the-two-sided-ideal%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
The left ideals of the matrix ring $S = M_n(R)$ over a (unital, associative) ring $R$ are in a $1–1$ correspondence with the left submodules of a free left $R$-module $R^n$ of rank $n$.
Given any left $R$-submodule $Kle R^n$ define the ideal $I(K)$ as those matrices whose rows are elements of $K$. If $M$ is such a matrix and $A$ is an arbitrary $ntimes n$ matrix over $R$, then $AM$ is a matrix whose rows are $R$-linear combinations of the rows of $M$, and so also contained in $K$. Similarly, by multiplying by elementary matrices (matrix units even), you get that every left ideal $I$ determines a submodule $K(I)$ consisting of the first rows of elements of the ideal. You then check that $I(K(I))=I$ and $K(I(K))=K$.
This is called Morita equivalence. The left ideal $P = I(Roplus0oplusdotsoplus 0) = I(Roplus 0^{n−1})$ is a direct summand of the left $S$-module $S$, and so is called a projective module. It is faithful, since $S simeq P^n$ as left $S$-modules. In other words, it is a progenerator. $I(K) = _SPotimes_R K$ and $K(I) = _Roperatorname{Hom}_S(P,I)$.
The short version is just that modules over $S$ are just big versions of modules over $R$. In particular, left ideals of $S$ are just left submodules of $R^n$.
Over some rings $R$, the submodules of $R^n$ can be significantly more complicated. Even for fields, the submodule lattice of $R=mathbb R$ is very simple: just $0 le R$. For $R^n$ one has the Grassmannian, which to my mind is quite a bit more complex than $R$. Other rings can be even worse, so one should be careful of leaning too heavily on the intuition for fields when dealing with matrix rings, though any Morita property will transfer between $R$ and $S$ without trouble using the "I()" and "K()" constructions.
add a comment |
The left ideals of the matrix ring $S = M_n(R)$ over a (unital, associative) ring $R$ are in a $1–1$ correspondence with the left submodules of a free left $R$-module $R^n$ of rank $n$.
Given any left $R$-submodule $Kle R^n$ define the ideal $I(K)$ as those matrices whose rows are elements of $K$. If $M$ is such a matrix and $A$ is an arbitrary $ntimes n$ matrix over $R$, then $AM$ is a matrix whose rows are $R$-linear combinations of the rows of $M$, and so also contained in $K$. Similarly, by multiplying by elementary matrices (matrix units even), you get that every left ideal $I$ determines a submodule $K(I)$ consisting of the first rows of elements of the ideal. You then check that $I(K(I))=I$ and $K(I(K))=K$.
This is called Morita equivalence. The left ideal $P = I(Roplus0oplusdotsoplus 0) = I(Roplus 0^{n−1})$ is a direct summand of the left $S$-module $S$, and so is called a projective module. It is faithful, since $S simeq P^n$ as left $S$-modules. In other words, it is a progenerator. $I(K) = _SPotimes_R K$ and $K(I) = _Roperatorname{Hom}_S(P,I)$.
The short version is just that modules over $S$ are just big versions of modules over $R$. In particular, left ideals of $S$ are just left submodules of $R^n$.
Over some rings $R$, the submodules of $R^n$ can be significantly more complicated. Even for fields, the submodule lattice of $R=mathbb R$ is very simple: just $0 le R$. For $R^n$ one has the Grassmannian, which to my mind is quite a bit more complex than $R$. Other rings can be even worse, so one should be careful of leaning too heavily on the intuition for fields when dealing with matrix rings, though any Morita property will transfer between $R$ and $S$ without trouble using the "I()" and "K()" constructions.
add a comment |
The left ideals of the matrix ring $S = M_n(R)$ over a (unital, associative) ring $R$ are in a $1–1$ correspondence with the left submodules of a free left $R$-module $R^n$ of rank $n$.
Given any left $R$-submodule $Kle R^n$ define the ideal $I(K)$ as those matrices whose rows are elements of $K$. If $M$ is such a matrix and $A$ is an arbitrary $ntimes n$ matrix over $R$, then $AM$ is a matrix whose rows are $R$-linear combinations of the rows of $M$, and so also contained in $K$. Similarly, by multiplying by elementary matrices (matrix units even), you get that every left ideal $I$ determines a submodule $K(I)$ consisting of the first rows of elements of the ideal. You then check that $I(K(I))=I$ and $K(I(K))=K$.
This is called Morita equivalence. The left ideal $P = I(Roplus0oplusdotsoplus 0) = I(Roplus 0^{n−1})$ is a direct summand of the left $S$-module $S$, and so is called a projective module. It is faithful, since $S simeq P^n$ as left $S$-modules. In other words, it is a progenerator. $I(K) = _SPotimes_R K$ and $K(I) = _Roperatorname{Hom}_S(P,I)$.
The short version is just that modules over $S$ are just big versions of modules over $R$. In particular, left ideals of $S$ are just left submodules of $R^n$.
Over some rings $R$, the submodules of $R^n$ can be significantly more complicated. Even for fields, the submodule lattice of $R=mathbb R$ is very simple: just $0 le R$. For $R^n$ one has the Grassmannian, which to my mind is quite a bit more complex than $R$. Other rings can be even worse, so one should be careful of leaning too heavily on the intuition for fields when dealing with matrix rings, though any Morita property will transfer between $R$ and $S$ without trouble using the "I()" and "K()" constructions.
The left ideals of the matrix ring $S = M_n(R)$ over a (unital, associative) ring $R$ are in a $1–1$ correspondence with the left submodules of a free left $R$-module $R^n$ of rank $n$.
Given any left $R$-submodule $Kle R^n$ define the ideal $I(K)$ as those matrices whose rows are elements of $K$. If $M$ is such a matrix and $A$ is an arbitrary $ntimes n$ matrix over $R$, then $AM$ is a matrix whose rows are $R$-linear combinations of the rows of $M$, and so also contained in $K$. Similarly, by multiplying by elementary matrices (matrix units even), you get that every left ideal $I$ determines a submodule $K(I)$ consisting of the first rows of elements of the ideal. You then check that $I(K(I))=I$ and $K(I(K))=K$.
This is called Morita equivalence. The left ideal $P = I(Roplus0oplusdotsoplus 0) = I(Roplus 0^{n−1})$ is a direct summand of the left $S$-module $S$, and so is called a projective module. It is faithful, since $S simeq P^n$ as left $S$-modules. In other words, it is a progenerator. $I(K) = _SPotimes_R K$ and $K(I) = _Roperatorname{Hom}_S(P,I)$.
The short version is just that modules over $S$ are just big versions of modules over $R$. In particular, left ideals of $S$ are just left submodules of $R^n$.
Over some rings $R$, the submodules of $R^n$ can be significantly more complicated. Even for fields, the submodule lattice of $R=mathbb R$ is very simple: just $0 le R$. For $R^n$ one has the Grassmannian, which to my mind is quite a bit more complex than $R$. Other rings can be even worse, so one should be careful of leaning too heavily on the intuition for fields when dealing with matrix rings, though any Morita property will transfer between $R$ and $S$ without trouble using the "I()" and "K()" constructions.
edited Apr 25 '13 at 12:11
user26857
answered Mar 14 '11 at 1:41
Jack Schmidt
43k570149
43k570149
add a comment |
add a comment |
For two-sided ideals, see the previous question which deals with fields. In the comments I state the description of ideals over a commutative ring with $1$: they are precisely the subrings that consist of matrices with coefficients in $mathcal{J}$, where $mathcal{J}$ is an ideal of $R$. The result for not-necessarily commutative rings is the obvious one. For rings without an identity, it gets a bit more complicated, but essentially the same kind of argument works.
For one-sided ideals, think about some of the argument given in the 2-sided case. You can do some of the stuff described, though perhaps not all. For instance, for left ideals, you can isolate rows. So perhaps you can modify the answer yoyo gives for the division ring case to a general case, along the same lines as the result for two-sided ideals generalizes from fields to the general case.
add a comment |
For two-sided ideals, see the previous question which deals with fields. In the comments I state the description of ideals over a commutative ring with $1$: they are precisely the subrings that consist of matrices with coefficients in $mathcal{J}$, where $mathcal{J}$ is an ideal of $R$. The result for not-necessarily commutative rings is the obvious one. For rings without an identity, it gets a bit more complicated, but essentially the same kind of argument works.
For one-sided ideals, think about some of the argument given in the 2-sided case. You can do some of the stuff described, though perhaps not all. For instance, for left ideals, you can isolate rows. So perhaps you can modify the answer yoyo gives for the division ring case to a general case, along the same lines as the result for two-sided ideals generalizes from fields to the general case.
add a comment |
For two-sided ideals, see the previous question which deals with fields. In the comments I state the description of ideals over a commutative ring with $1$: they are precisely the subrings that consist of matrices with coefficients in $mathcal{J}$, where $mathcal{J}$ is an ideal of $R$. The result for not-necessarily commutative rings is the obvious one. For rings without an identity, it gets a bit more complicated, but essentially the same kind of argument works.
For one-sided ideals, think about some of the argument given in the 2-sided case. You can do some of the stuff described, though perhaps not all. For instance, for left ideals, you can isolate rows. So perhaps you can modify the answer yoyo gives for the division ring case to a general case, along the same lines as the result for two-sided ideals generalizes from fields to the general case.
For two-sided ideals, see the previous question which deals with fields. In the comments I state the description of ideals over a commutative ring with $1$: they are precisely the subrings that consist of matrices with coefficients in $mathcal{J}$, where $mathcal{J}$ is an ideal of $R$. The result for not-necessarily commutative rings is the obvious one. For rings without an identity, it gets a bit more complicated, but essentially the same kind of argument works.
For one-sided ideals, think about some of the argument given in the 2-sided case. You can do some of the stuff described, though perhaps not all. For instance, for left ideals, you can isolate rows. So perhaps you can modify the answer yoyo gives for the division ring case to a general case, along the same lines as the result for two-sided ideals generalizes from fields to the general case.
edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:21
Community♦
1
1
answered Mar 13 '11 at 22:22
Arturo Magidin
261k32585905
261k32585905
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f26726%2fwhat-are-the-left-and-right-ideals-of-matrix-ring-how-about-the-two-sided-ideal%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
Hint: as a left module over itself, the matrix ring decomposes into a direct sum of copies of the module of column vectors.
– Rasmus
Mar 13 '11 at 16:47
1
Concerning twosided ideals: try taking a non-zero matrix and multiply from the left and from the right with varius matrices. See what you can get this way.
– Rasmus
Mar 13 '11 at 16:48