Division algebra

Last updated May 02, 2024

In the field of mathematics called abstract algebra, a division algebra is, roughly speaking, an algebra over a field in which division, except by zero, is always possible.

Definitions

Formally, we start with a non-zero algebra D over a field. We call D a division algebra if for any element a in D and any non-zero element b in D there exists precisely one element x in D with a = bx and precisely one element y in D such that a = yb.

For associative algebras, the definition can be simplified as follows: a non-zero associative algebra over a field is a division algebra if and only if it has a multiplicative identity element 1 and every non-zero element a has a multiplicative inverse (i.e. an element x with ax = xa = 1).

Associative division algebras

The best-known examples of associative division algebras are the finite-dimensional real ones (that is, algebras over the field R of real numbers, which are finite-dimensional as a vector space over the reals). The Frobenius theorem states that up to isomorphism there are three such algebras: the reals themselves (dimension 1), the field of complex numbers (dimension 2), and the quaternions (dimension 4).

Wedderburn's little theorem states that if D is a finite division algebra, then D is a finite field.^[1]

Over an algebraically closed field K (for example the complex numbers C), there are no finite-dimensional associative division algebras, except K itself.^[2]

Associative division algebras have no nonzero zero divisors. A finite-dimensional unital associative algebra (over any field) is a division algebra if and only if it has no nonzero zero divisors.

Whenever A is an associative unital algebra over the field F and S is a simple module over A, then the endomorphism ring of S is a division algebra over F; every associative division algebra over F arises in this fashion.

The center of an associative division algebra D over the field K is a field containing K. The dimension of such an algebra over its center, if finite, is a perfect square: it is equal to the square of the dimension of a maximal subfield of D over the center. Given a field F, the Brauer equivalence classes of simple (contains only trivial two-sided ideals) associative division algebras whose center is F and which are finite-dimensional over F can be turned into a group, the Brauer group of the field F.

One way to construct finite-dimensional associative division algebras over arbitrary fields is given by the quaternion algebras (see also quaternions).

For infinite-dimensional associative division algebras, the most important cases are those where the space has some reasonable topology. See for example normed division algebras and Banach algebras.

Not necessarily associative division algebras

If the division algebra is not assumed to be associative, usually some weaker condition (such as alternativity or power associativity) is imposed instead. See algebra over a field for a list of such conditions.

Over the reals there are (up to isomorphism) only two unitary commutative finite-dimensional division algebras: the reals themselves, and the complex numbers. These are of course both associative. For a non-associative example, consider the complex numbers with multiplication defined by taking the complex conjugate of the usual multiplication:

a*b={\overline {ab}}.

This is a commutative, non-associative division algebra of dimension 2 over the reals, and has no unit element. There are infinitely many other non-isomorphic commutative, non-associative, finite-dimensional real divisional algebras, but they all have dimension 2.

In fact, every finite-dimensional real commutative division algebra is either 1- or 2-dimensional. This is known as Hopf's theorem, and was proved in 1940. The proof uses methods from topology. Although a later proof was found using algebraic geometry, no direct algebraic proof is known. The fundamental theorem of algebra is a corollary of Hopf's theorem.

Dropping the requirement of commutativity, Hopf generalized his result: Any finite-dimensional real division algebra must have dimension a power of 2.

Later work showed that in fact, any finite-dimensional real division algebra must be of dimension 1, 2, 4, or 8. This was independently proved by Michel Kervaire and John Milnor in 1958, again using techniques of algebraic topology, in particular K-theory. Adolf Hurwitz had shown in 1898 that the identity $q{\overline {q}}={\text{sum of squares}}$ held only for dimensions 1, 2, 4 and 8.^[3] (See Hurwitz's theorem.) The challenge of constructing a division algebra of three dimensions was tackled by several early mathematicians. Kenneth O. May surveyed these attempts in 1966.^[4]

Any real finite-dimensional division algebra over the reals must be

isomorphic to R or C if unitary and commutative (equivalently: associative and commutative)
isomorphic to the quaternions if noncommutative but associative
isomorphic to the octonions if non-associative but alternative.

The following is known about the dimension of a finite-dimensional division algebra A over a field K:

dim A = 1 if K is algebraically closed,
dim A = 1, 2, 4 or 8 if K is real closed, and
If K is neither algebraically nor real closed, then there are infinitely many dimensions in which there exist division algebras over K.

We may say an algebra Ahas multiplicative inverses if for any nonzero $a\in A$ there is an element $a^{-1}\in A$ with $aa^{-1}=a^{-1}a=1$ . An associative algebra has multiplicative inverses if and only if it is a division algebra. However, this fails for nonassociative algebras. The sedenions are a nonassociative algebra over the real numbers that has multiplicative inverses, but is not a division algebra. On the other hand, we can construct a division algebra without multiplicative inverses by taking the quaternions and modifying the product, setting $i^{2}=-1+\epsilon j$ for some small nonzero real number $\epsilon$ while leaving the rest of the multiplication table unchanged. The element $i$ then has both right and left inverses, but they are not equal.

Notes

↑ Lam (2001), p. 203
↑ Cohn (2003), Proposition 5.4.5, p. 150
↑ Roger Penrose (2005). The Road To Reality. Vintage. ISBN 0-09-944068-7., p.202
↑ Kenneth O. May (1966) "The Impossiblility of a Division Algebra of Vectors in Three Dimensional Space", American Mathematical Monthly 73(3): 289–91 doi : 10.2307/2315349

Related Research Articles

In mathematics, especially functional analysis, a Banach algebra, named after Stefan Banach, is an associative algebra $over the real or complex numbers that at the same time is also a Banach space, that is, a normed space that is complete in the metric induced by the norm. The norm is required to satisfy$

In algebra, a division ring, also called a skew field, is a nontrivial ring in which division by nonzero elements is defined. Specifically, it is a nontrivial ring in which every nonzero element $a$ has a multiplicative inverse, that is, an element usually denoted $a -1$ , such that $a a -1 = a -1 a = 1$ . So, (right) division may be defined as $a / b = a b -1$ , but this notation is avoided, as one may have $a b -1 \neq b -1 a$ .

In mathematics, a field is a set on which addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division are defined and behave as the corresponding operations on rational and real numbers. A field is thus a fundamental algebraic structure which is widely used in algebra, number theory, and many other areas of mathematics.

In mathematics, rings are algebraic structures that generalize fields: multiplication need not be commutative and multiplicative inverses need not exist. Informally, a ring is a set equipped with two binary operations satisfying properties analogous to those of addition and multiplication of integers. Ring elements may be numbers such as integers or complex numbers, but they may also be non-numerical objects such as polynomials, square matrices, functions, and power series.

In mathematics, hypercomplex number is a traditional term for an element of a finite-dimensional unital algebra over the field of real numbers. The study of hypercomplex numbers in the late 19th century forms the basis of modern group representation theory.

In mathematics, the quaternion number system extends the complex numbers. Quaternions were first described by the Irish mathematician William Rowan Hamilton in 1843 and applied to mechanics in three-dimensional space. The algebra of quaternions is often denoted by $H$ , or in blackboard bold by $Quaternions are not a field, because multiplication of quaternions is not, in general, commutative. Quaternions provide a definition of the quotient of two vectors in a three-dimensional space. Quaternions are generally represented in the form$

In mathematics, a commutative ring is a ring in which the multiplication operation is commutative. The study of commutative rings is called commutative algebra. Complementarily, noncommutative algebra is the study of ring properties that are not specific to commutative rings. This distinction results from the high number of fundamental properties of commutative rings that do not extend to noncommutative rings.

In mathematics, the Cayley–Dickson construction, named after Arthur Cayley and Leonard Eugene Dickson, produces a sequence of algebras over the field of real numbers, each with twice the dimension of the previous one. The algebras produced by this process are known as Cayley–Dickson algebras, for example complex numbers, quaternions, and octonions. These examples are useful composition algebras frequently applied in mathematical physics.

In mathematics, a Hopf algebra, named after Heinz Hopf, is a structure that is simultaneously an algebra and a coalgebra, with these structures' compatibility making it a bialgebra, and that moreover is equipped with an antihomomorphism satisfying a certain property. The representation theory of a Hopf algebra is particularly nice, since the existence of compatible comultiplication, counit, and antipode allows for the construction of tensor products of representations, trivial representations, and dual representations.

In algebra, a group ring is a free module and at the same time a ring, constructed in a natural way from any given ring and any given group. As a free module, its ring of scalars is the given ring, and its basis is the set of elements of the given group. As a ring, its addition law is that of the free module and its multiplication extends "by linearity" the given group law on the basis. Less formally, a group ring is a generalization of a given group, by attaching to each element of the group a "weighting factor" from a given ring.

In mathematics, the Brauer group of a field K is an abelian group whose elements are Morita equivalence classes of central simple algebras over K, with addition given by the tensor product of algebras. It was defined by the algebraist Richard Brauer.

In ring theory and related areas of mathematics a central simple algebra (CSA) over a field K is a finite-dimensional associative K-algebraA which is simple, and for which the center is exactly K.

In abstract algebra, a branch of mathematics, a simple ring is a non-zero ring that has no two-sided ideal besides the zero ideal and itself. In particular, a commutative ring is a simple ring if and only if it is a field.

In mathematics, a formal group law is a formal power series behaving as if it were the product of a Lie group. They were introduced by S. Bochner. The term formal group sometimes means the same as formal group law, and sometimes means one of several generalizations. Formal groups are intermediate between Lie groups and Lie algebras. They are used in algebraic number theory and algebraic topology.

In mathematics, a quaternion algebra over a field F is a central simple algebra A over F that has dimension 4 over F. Every quaternion algebra becomes a matrix algebra by extending scalars, i.e. for a suitable field extension K of F, $is isomorphic to the 2 \times 2 matrix algebra over K .$

In mathematics, a composition algebra $A$ over a field $K$ is a not necessarily associative algebra over $K$ together with a nondegenerate quadratic form $N$ that satisfies

A non-associative algebra (or distributive algebra) is an algebra over a field where the binary multiplication operation is not assumed to be associative. That is, an algebraic structure A is a non-associative algebra over a field K if it is a vector space over K and is equipped with a K-bilinear binary multiplication operation A × A → A which may or may not be associative. Examples include Lie algebras, Jordan algebras, the octonions, and three-dimensional Euclidean space equipped with the cross product operation. Since it is not assumed that the multiplication is associative, using parentheses to indicate the order of multiplications is necessary. For example, the expressions (ab)(cd), (a(bc))d and a(b(cd)) may all yield different answers.

In mathematics, a semifield is an algebraic structure with two binary operations, addition and multiplication, which is similar to a field, but with some axioms relaxed.

In mathematics, a noncommutative ring is a ring whose multiplication is not commutative; that is, there exist a and b in the ring such that ab and ba are different. Equivalently, a noncommutative ring is a ring that is not a commutative ring.

References

Cohn, Paul Moritz (2003). Basic algebra: groups, rings, and fields. London: Springer-Verlag. doi:10.1007/978-0-85729-428-9. ISBN 978-1-85233-587-8. MR 1935285.
Lam, Tsit-Yuen (2001). A first course in noncommutative rings. Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Vol. 131 (2 ed.). Springer. ISBN 0-387-95183-0.

External links

"Division algebra", Encyclopedia of Mathematics , EMS Press, 2001 [1994]

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.

[1] Lam (2001), p. 203

[2] Cohn (2003), Proposition 5.4.5, p. 150

[3] Roger Penrose (2005). The Road To Reality. Vintage. ISBN 0-09-944068-7., p.202

[4] Kenneth O. May (1966) "The Impossiblility of a Division Algebra of Vectors in Three Dimensional Space", American Mathematical Monthly 73(3): 289–91 doi : 10.2307/2315349

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]