Direct sum of Matrix algebras is not isomorphic to some semigroup algebra

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
1
down vote

favorite
1












An $n times n$ matrix unit is any matrix which has zeros every, except at one position where it has one. By $E_ij^(n)$ we denote the $n times n$ matrix unit which has its one at the $i$-th row and $j$-th column.



Fix some field $F$, then surely the $n times n$ matrices $M_ntimes n(F)$ could be written in terms of the matrix units. And a more formal way to state that is that if $S$ denotes the semigroup of all matrix units with the zero matrix, then $M_ntimes n(F) cong F_0(S)$, where $F_0(S)$ denotes the contracted semigroup algebra, which is the usual semigroup algebra (i.e. formal sums) with the zero element identified, i.e. $F_0(S)$ has a basis $B$ such that $B cup 0$ is isomorphic with $S$.



This seems quite clear, but now suppose we look at
$$
A = M_n times n(F) oplus M_ntimes n(F)
$$
in the sense that the product of the direct factors is zero, i.e. think as an external direct sum. We can form the semigroup
$$
S = (E_ij^(n), 0), (0, E_ij^(n)) mid 0 le i,j le n cup (0,0)
$$
with the product. Then I think we also have $A cong F_0[S]$? But according to my text this should not be the case, so what am I missing. Why could $A$ be not isomorphic to a semigroup algebra?



Background: The text I am refering to is The algebraic theory of semigroups, Volume I by Clifford/Preston. In this book the following Theorem appears (page 167, Theorem 5.30):




Let $A$ be a semisimple algebra of finite order over a field $F$. If $A = F[S]$ for some (finite) semigroup $S$, then one of the simple components of $A$ is of order $1$ over $F$.




Which clearly contradicts the above situation, where both compoents of $A$ have order $n$ as matrix algebras. Also note that $F_0[S^0] cong F[S]$, where $S^0$ denotes that semigroup $S$ with a zero adjoined (i.e. taking a new element $0 notin S$ and set $0cdot x = x cdot 0 = 0$ for every $x in S$ and $S^0 = S cup0$). Hence every semigroup algebra could be regarded as a contracted semigroup algebra.










share|cite|improve this question



















  • 1




    Again, $A$ will be a contracted semigroup algebra, because the $left(0,0right)$ in $S$ maps to the zero matrix. I think the theorem you're quoting is about non-contracted semigroup algebras.
    – darij grinberg
    Sep 9 at 13:55











  • @darijgrinberg Why should that be a problem? Every semigroup algebra could be considered as a contracted one, see my last paragraph....
    – StefanH
    Sep 9 at 13:59






  • 1




    Nope. Not every monoid can be written as $S cup left0right$ for a semigroup $S$. This works only if it has no zero-divisors.
    – darij grinberg
    Sep 9 at 14:00










  • @darijgrinberg Yes, sorry bad notation. I meant adjoining a zero. Which is always possible, just add an element $0$ and set $0cdot x = x cdot 0 = 0$ for every $x in S$. It does not mean to take an existing zero!
    – StefanH
    Sep 9 at 14:01










  • @darijgrinberg I changed the notation to $S^0$ for $S$ with a zero adjoined.
    – StefanH
    Sep 9 at 14:04














up vote
1
down vote

favorite
1












An $n times n$ matrix unit is any matrix which has zeros every, except at one position where it has one. By $E_ij^(n)$ we denote the $n times n$ matrix unit which has its one at the $i$-th row and $j$-th column.



Fix some field $F$, then surely the $n times n$ matrices $M_ntimes n(F)$ could be written in terms of the matrix units. And a more formal way to state that is that if $S$ denotes the semigroup of all matrix units with the zero matrix, then $M_ntimes n(F) cong F_0(S)$, where $F_0(S)$ denotes the contracted semigroup algebra, which is the usual semigroup algebra (i.e. formal sums) with the zero element identified, i.e. $F_0(S)$ has a basis $B$ such that $B cup 0$ is isomorphic with $S$.



This seems quite clear, but now suppose we look at
$$
A = M_n times n(F) oplus M_ntimes n(F)
$$
in the sense that the product of the direct factors is zero, i.e. think as an external direct sum. We can form the semigroup
$$
S = (E_ij^(n), 0), (0, E_ij^(n)) mid 0 le i,j le n cup (0,0)
$$
with the product. Then I think we also have $A cong F_0[S]$? But according to my text this should not be the case, so what am I missing. Why could $A$ be not isomorphic to a semigroup algebra?



Background: The text I am refering to is The algebraic theory of semigroups, Volume I by Clifford/Preston. In this book the following Theorem appears (page 167, Theorem 5.30):




Let $A$ be a semisimple algebra of finite order over a field $F$. If $A = F[S]$ for some (finite) semigroup $S$, then one of the simple components of $A$ is of order $1$ over $F$.




Which clearly contradicts the above situation, where both compoents of $A$ have order $n$ as matrix algebras. Also note that $F_0[S^0] cong F[S]$, where $S^0$ denotes that semigroup $S$ with a zero adjoined (i.e. taking a new element $0 notin S$ and set $0cdot x = x cdot 0 = 0$ for every $x in S$ and $S^0 = S cup0$). Hence every semigroup algebra could be regarded as a contracted semigroup algebra.










share|cite|improve this question



















  • 1




    Again, $A$ will be a contracted semigroup algebra, because the $left(0,0right)$ in $S$ maps to the zero matrix. I think the theorem you're quoting is about non-contracted semigroup algebras.
    – darij grinberg
    Sep 9 at 13:55











  • @darijgrinberg Why should that be a problem? Every semigroup algebra could be considered as a contracted one, see my last paragraph....
    – StefanH
    Sep 9 at 13:59






  • 1




    Nope. Not every monoid can be written as $S cup left0right$ for a semigroup $S$. This works only if it has no zero-divisors.
    – darij grinberg
    Sep 9 at 14:00










  • @darijgrinberg Yes, sorry bad notation. I meant adjoining a zero. Which is always possible, just add an element $0$ and set $0cdot x = x cdot 0 = 0$ for every $x in S$. It does not mean to take an existing zero!
    – StefanH
    Sep 9 at 14:01










  • @darijgrinberg I changed the notation to $S^0$ for $S$ with a zero adjoined.
    – StefanH
    Sep 9 at 14:04












up vote
1
down vote

favorite
1









up vote
1
down vote

favorite
1






1





An $n times n$ matrix unit is any matrix which has zeros every, except at one position where it has one. By $E_ij^(n)$ we denote the $n times n$ matrix unit which has its one at the $i$-th row and $j$-th column.



Fix some field $F$, then surely the $n times n$ matrices $M_ntimes n(F)$ could be written in terms of the matrix units. And a more formal way to state that is that if $S$ denotes the semigroup of all matrix units with the zero matrix, then $M_ntimes n(F) cong F_0(S)$, where $F_0(S)$ denotes the contracted semigroup algebra, which is the usual semigroup algebra (i.e. formal sums) with the zero element identified, i.e. $F_0(S)$ has a basis $B$ such that $B cup 0$ is isomorphic with $S$.



This seems quite clear, but now suppose we look at
$$
A = M_n times n(F) oplus M_ntimes n(F)
$$
in the sense that the product of the direct factors is zero, i.e. think as an external direct sum. We can form the semigroup
$$
S = (E_ij^(n), 0), (0, E_ij^(n)) mid 0 le i,j le n cup (0,0)
$$
with the product. Then I think we also have $A cong F_0[S]$? But according to my text this should not be the case, so what am I missing. Why could $A$ be not isomorphic to a semigroup algebra?



Background: The text I am refering to is The algebraic theory of semigroups, Volume I by Clifford/Preston. In this book the following Theorem appears (page 167, Theorem 5.30):




Let $A$ be a semisimple algebra of finite order over a field $F$. If $A = F[S]$ for some (finite) semigroup $S$, then one of the simple components of $A$ is of order $1$ over $F$.




Which clearly contradicts the above situation, where both compoents of $A$ have order $n$ as matrix algebras. Also note that $F_0[S^0] cong F[S]$, where $S^0$ denotes that semigroup $S$ with a zero adjoined (i.e. taking a new element $0 notin S$ and set $0cdot x = x cdot 0 = 0$ for every $x in S$ and $S^0 = S cup0$). Hence every semigroup algebra could be regarded as a contracted semigroup algebra.










share|cite|improve this question















An $n times n$ matrix unit is any matrix which has zeros every, except at one position where it has one. By $E_ij^(n)$ we denote the $n times n$ matrix unit which has its one at the $i$-th row and $j$-th column.



Fix some field $F$, then surely the $n times n$ matrices $M_ntimes n(F)$ could be written in terms of the matrix units. And a more formal way to state that is that if $S$ denotes the semigroup of all matrix units with the zero matrix, then $M_ntimes n(F) cong F_0(S)$, where $F_0(S)$ denotes the contracted semigroup algebra, which is the usual semigroup algebra (i.e. formal sums) with the zero element identified, i.e. $F_0(S)$ has a basis $B$ such that $B cup 0$ is isomorphic with $S$.



This seems quite clear, but now suppose we look at
$$
A = M_n times n(F) oplus M_ntimes n(F)
$$
in the sense that the product of the direct factors is zero, i.e. think as an external direct sum. We can form the semigroup
$$
S = (E_ij^(n), 0), (0, E_ij^(n)) mid 0 le i,j le n cup (0,0)
$$
with the product. Then I think we also have $A cong F_0[S]$? But according to my text this should not be the case, so what am I missing. Why could $A$ be not isomorphic to a semigroup algebra?



Background: The text I am refering to is The algebraic theory of semigroups, Volume I by Clifford/Preston. In this book the following Theorem appears (page 167, Theorem 5.30):




Let $A$ be a semisimple algebra of finite order over a field $F$. If $A = F[S]$ for some (finite) semigroup $S$, then one of the simple components of $A$ is of order $1$ over $F$.




Which clearly contradicts the above situation, where both compoents of $A$ have order $n$ as matrix algebras. Also note that $F_0[S^0] cong F[S]$, where $S^0$ denotes that semigroup $S$ with a zero adjoined (i.e. taking a new element $0 notin S$ and set $0cdot x = x cdot 0 = 0$ for every $x in S$ and $S^0 = S cup0$). Hence every semigroup algebra could be regarded as a contracted semigroup algebra.







abstract-algebra matrices representation-theory noncommutative-algebra semigroups






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Sep 9 at 14:03

























asked Sep 9 at 13:25









StefanH

7,92741959




7,92741959







  • 1




    Again, $A$ will be a contracted semigroup algebra, because the $left(0,0right)$ in $S$ maps to the zero matrix. I think the theorem you're quoting is about non-contracted semigroup algebras.
    – darij grinberg
    Sep 9 at 13:55











  • @darijgrinberg Why should that be a problem? Every semigroup algebra could be considered as a contracted one, see my last paragraph....
    – StefanH
    Sep 9 at 13:59






  • 1




    Nope. Not every monoid can be written as $S cup left0right$ for a semigroup $S$. This works only if it has no zero-divisors.
    – darij grinberg
    Sep 9 at 14:00










  • @darijgrinberg Yes, sorry bad notation. I meant adjoining a zero. Which is always possible, just add an element $0$ and set $0cdot x = x cdot 0 = 0$ for every $x in S$. It does not mean to take an existing zero!
    – StefanH
    Sep 9 at 14:01










  • @darijgrinberg I changed the notation to $S^0$ for $S$ with a zero adjoined.
    – StefanH
    Sep 9 at 14:04












  • 1




    Again, $A$ will be a contracted semigroup algebra, because the $left(0,0right)$ in $S$ maps to the zero matrix. I think the theorem you're quoting is about non-contracted semigroup algebras.
    – darij grinberg
    Sep 9 at 13:55











  • @darijgrinberg Why should that be a problem? Every semigroup algebra could be considered as a contracted one, see my last paragraph....
    – StefanH
    Sep 9 at 13:59






  • 1




    Nope. Not every monoid can be written as $S cup left0right$ for a semigroup $S$. This works only if it has no zero-divisors.
    – darij grinberg
    Sep 9 at 14:00










  • @darijgrinberg Yes, sorry bad notation. I meant adjoining a zero. Which is always possible, just add an element $0$ and set $0cdot x = x cdot 0 = 0$ for every $x in S$. It does not mean to take an existing zero!
    – StefanH
    Sep 9 at 14:01










  • @darijgrinberg I changed the notation to $S^0$ for $S$ with a zero adjoined.
    – StefanH
    Sep 9 at 14:04







1




1




Again, $A$ will be a contracted semigroup algebra, because the $left(0,0right)$ in $S$ maps to the zero matrix. I think the theorem you're quoting is about non-contracted semigroup algebras.
– darij grinberg
Sep 9 at 13:55





Again, $A$ will be a contracted semigroup algebra, because the $left(0,0right)$ in $S$ maps to the zero matrix. I think the theorem you're quoting is about non-contracted semigroup algebras.
– darij grinberg
Sep 9 at 13:55













@darijgrinberg Why should that be a problem? Every semigroup algebra could be considered as a contracted one, see my last paragraph....
– StefanH
Sep 9 at 13:59




@darijgrinberg Why should that be a problem? Every semigroup algebra could be considered as a contracted one, see my last paragraph....
– StefanH
Sep 9 at 13:59




1




1




Nope. Not every monoid can be written as $S cup left0right$ for a semigroup $S$. This works only if it has no zero-divisors.
– darij grinberg
Sep 9 at 14:00




Nope. Not every monoid can be written as $S cup left0right$ for a semigroup $S$. This works only if it has no zero-divisors.
– darij grinberg
Sep 9 at 14:00












@darijgrinberg Yes, sorry bad notation. I meant adjoining a zero. Which is always possible, just add an element $0$ and set $0cdot x = x cdot 0 = 0$ for every $x in S$. It does not mean to take an existing zero!
– StefanH
Sep 9 at 14:01




@darijgrinberg Yes, sorry bad notation. I meant adjoining a zero. Which is always possible, just add an element $0$ and set $0cdot x = x cdot 0 = 0$ for every $x in S$. It does not mean to take an existing zero!
– StefanH
Sep 9 at 14:01












@darijgrinberg I changed the notation to $S^0$ for $S$ with a zero adjoined.
– StefanH
Sep 9 at 14:04




@darijgrinberg I changed the notation to $S^0$ for $S$ with a zero adjoined.
– StefanH
Sep 9 at 14:04















active

oldest

votes











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',
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: false,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













 

draft saved


draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2910780%2fdirect-sum-of-matrix-algebras-is-not-isomorphic-to-some-semigroup-algebra%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest



































active

oldest

votes













active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes















 

draft saved


draft discarded















































 


draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2910780%2fdirect-sum-of-matrix-algebras-is-not-isomorphic-to-some-semigroup-algebra%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest













































































這個網誌中的熱門文章

Why am i infinitely getting the same tweet with the Twitter Search API?

Is there any way to eliminate the singular point to solve this integral by hand or by approximations?

Strongly p-embedded subgroups and p-Sylow subgroups.