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

Multi tool use
Multi tool use

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













































































M0sFSpSHAmJ,qjwqT70cTs5diKQk8uC
xW1U qI,BlXEUkyk,n,KCQJggN,W JvZ3BOZiVf2mhwiiY6tPVHc9hh2

這個網誌中的熱門文章

How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

Propositional logic and tautologies

Distribution of Stopped Wiener Process with Stochastic Volatility