Timeline for What properties "should" spectrum of noncommutative ring have?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 17, 2015 at 1:52 | comment | added | Jonathan Gleason | I think the map $A\rightarrow k=\mathrm{End}\, _{\mathsf{Vect}_k}(k)$ into a field should be thought of as a representation of $A$, so that in the general non-commutative case, $\rho :A\rightarrow E$ with $E$ not necessarily a field, we don't want $E$ itself to be a division ring, but rather, 'maps that commute $\rho$' to form a division ring. (I'm being imprecise about this on purpose because I'm not sure what the 'correct' notion of morphism should be.) | |
| Jul 25, 2012 at 17:23 | comment | added | Rasmus | For a non-commutative ring $A$, one might replace Field be some meaningful full subcategory of test objects in Ring. A naive first thought would be skewfields. | |
| Oct 25, 2010 at 11:29 | comment | added | Martin Brandenburg | Interesting answer, but it does not deal with noncommutative rings (which was the question). | |
| Feb 21, 2010 at 11:05 | vote | accept | Shizhuo Zhang | ||
| Feb 15, 2010 at 13:22 | history | answered | Tom Leinster | CC BY-SA 2.5 |