MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Background

I'm reading the article "Topological Representations of Algebras" by Arens, Kaplansky. In the proof of Theorem 6.1 we have the following situation: $X$ is a Stone space, $X_\alpha$ is a family of closed subsets, $K$ is a field with an algebraic closure $M$ and separable closure $L \subseteq M$, $L_\alpha$ are the intermediate fields of $M/L$, $R$ is the ring of continuous functions $X \to K^{alg}$ which map $X_\alpha$ to $K_\alpha$, $G = Aut(L/K)$ is the absolute Galois group of $K$, which may be identified with $Aut(M/K)$. Now, why does $G$ act on $R$ via $(g f)(x) = g f(x)$?

Question

Why is this action well-defined? Don't we need that $L_\alpha / K $ is normal for that? But I doubt that this is true for every algebraic extension of $L$.

There are several other problems in the proof, which arise from the fact that the isomorphism with the ring of study with $R$ is not canonical, but perhaps I'm just missing something ...

Edit: I wonder why nobody answers ... is it too easy? :-)

share|cite|improve this question
4  
Edited the title per an old discussion on meta (tea.mathoverflow.net/discussion/419/is-this-an-error-in-a-paper/…) which seemed to conclude that it's better not to phrase MO questions in ways that imply that a paper is wrong, rather to phrase them in a way that says you have a question about a particular point in a paper. – Noah Snyder Jun 12 '10 at 15:39

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.