4
$\begingroup$

Let $R_1,R_2$ be (left and right) ore domains. Does $ Mat_n(R_1)\cong Mat_m(R_2)$ implie m=n and $q.f.(R_1)\cong q.f.(R_2)$?

An counter example, a proof or a reference is welcomed.

Thanks

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

3
$\begingroup$

In an non-commutative ring $A$, recall that an idempotent $\pi$ is an element with $\pi^2=\pi$. Two idempotents $\pi$ and $\pi'$ are called orthogonal if $\pi \pi' = \pi' \pi=0$.

Claim Let $D$ be a division algebra. Then $n$ is the maximal size of a set of nonzero mutually orthogonal idempotents in $M_n(D)$.

Proof Clearly, there is a set of size $n$: Take $\pi_k$ to be $1$ in position $(k,k)$ and $0$ everywhere else.

It is more convenient to work in a coordinate free manner: Let $V$ be a finite dimensional $D^{op}$ vector space, and let $E(V)$ be the $D^{op}$ endomorphism ring of $V$. We will show that there are at most $\dim_{D^{op}} V$ mutually orthogonal idempotents in $E(V)$.

So, suppose that there are $r$ mutually orthogonal idempotents in $V$. We must show that $\dim_{D^{\op}}(V) \geq r$. Our proof is by induction on $r$; the case $r=0$ is vacuous.

Let $K$ be the kernel of $\pi_r$ and let $I$ be the image. We claim that $K \cap I = \{ 0 \}$. Proof: If $w \in K \cap I$ then $w = \pi v$ for some $v \in V$ and $0=\pi w = \pi^2 v = \pi v = w$.

So $\dim V \geq \dim K + \dim I$ and, as $\pi_r \neq 0$, we get $\dim I \geq 1$.

Using $\pi_i \pi_r = \pi_r \pi_i$, we see that each $\pi_i$ takes $I$ and $K$ to themselves. So the $\pi_i$ form orthogonal idempotents of $K$. Using $\pi_i \pi_r =0$, we see that $\pi_i|_I=0$, so the $\pi_i$ are still nonzero when restricted to $K$. So, inductively, $\dim K \geq r-1$ and then $\dim V \geq r-1$. $\square$

That was division algebras, now for Ore domains. If $R$ is an Ore domain and $D$ its skew field of fractions, then $M_n(R)$ embeds into $M_n(D)$, so $M_n(R)$ cannot have more than $n$ mutually orthogonal idempotents, and the example given in the above proof shows that $M_n(R)$ does have that many. We have shown that $n$ can be recovered from a ring-theoretic property of $M_n(R)$.

I don't know what q.f. means, but Andreas Thom, in a deleted answer, gives an example of Smith where $A \not \cong B$ but $M_2(A) \cong M_2(B)$. I believe that $M_n(D)$ does determine $D$ if $D$ is a division ring, since I think that the above proof should show that $D \cong \pi M_n(D) \pi$ where $\pi$ is part of a maximal list of mutually orthogonal idempotents, but that doesn't generalize to $M_n(R)$ as far as I can see.

$\endgroup$
3
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Thanks a lot. in fact i more like a reference for such result. q.f.(R) is the skew field of fraactions. Since the isomorphisms of matrix rings over division rings will imply the isomorphisms of division rings. I wonder whether we can find somewhere that the maximal right ring of quotient of $Mat_n(R)$ is $Mat_n(q.f.(R))$? $\endgroup$
    – rrr
    Jul 22, 2014 at 5:00
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ That the maximal right ring of quotients of $Mat_n(R)$ is $Mat_n(q.f(R))$ (in your notation) follows immediately from Corollary 3.1.6 of McConnell and Robson's book `Noncommutative Noetherian rings': ams.org/bookstore-getitem/item=GSM-30 $\endgroup$ Jul 22, 2014 at 9:04
  • $\begingroup$ Many Thanks. It is exactly what i want. $\endgroup$
    – rrr
    Jul 22, 2014 at 15:48

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.