Skip to main content
17 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Oct 14, 2014 at 14:23 comment added Martin Brandenburg A counterexample is given in Arens-Kaplansky, "Topological representations of algebras", Section 8.
Oct 13, 2014 at 19:32 comment added Martin Brandenburg I am still not convinced. I don't see any embedding without using some actions. If Neil's answer is correct (which I believe more and more), then the classification in terms of closed subsets would mean, roughly, that any $C_2$-action on a Stone spaces splits outside the closed subset of fixed points, where I call a $C_2$-space split iff it is isomorphic to $Y \coprod \sigma Y$ for some space $Y$. I don't see any reason why there should be such a splitting. And this is also where cohomology might show obstructions.
Oct 13, 2014 at 18:49 comment added David Handelman It's easier to use direct limits. Every fg unital subring, $A$ of $T$, is finite and semisimple, so is a product of finitely many copies of $F_2$ and of $F_4$. Let $X_A$ be its maximal ideal space. If $A \subset A'$, there is the natural onto map $X_{A'} \to X_A$. For $E_A$, the subset of $X_S$ consisting of ideals of index two, the restriction from $X_{A'}$ to $E_{A'}$ has image in $E_A$ (not onto). Then $X = \lim_{\leftarrow} X_A$ (over finite subrings) is the maximal ideal space of $T$; set $Y = \lim_{\leftarrow} E_A$ (closed subset of $X$). Thus the embedding $T \subset S(X,Y)$, etc.
Oct 13, 2014 at 18:43 comment added David Handelman To answer the last question first. For $t \in T$, $V:= t^{-1}(\{u\})$ is clopen in $X$, hence its indicator function $e = \chi_V$ belong to $R$. Then $et = u\chi_V$ is a product of elements of $T$, hence also belongs.
Oct 11, 2014 at 18:02 comment added Martin Brandenburg Another question: ".. and corresponding $t_i = \chi_{V_i} t_i$ in $T$ ..." - Why can we assume that $t_i$ supported on $V_i$?
Oct 9, 2014 at 9:50 comment added Martin Brandenburg And in the edit, one has to be more careful as for the transition functions of the colimit ...
Oct 9, 2014 at 9:29 comment added Martin Brandenburg How do you construct the homomorphism $T \to S(X,Y)$? The residue fields embed into $\mathbb{F}_4$, but not in a canonical way. I don't see why we can choose compatible embeddings. This is the reason why I think that cohomology might enter here.
Sep 29, 2014 at 23:44 comment added David Handelman Yes, I should have said fixed ring, not the image; the important thing is that all the idempotents of $R$ belong to $T$, which is obvious anyway.
Sep 29, 2014 at 18:34 comment added Laurent Moret-Bailly I think you mean that $T_0$ is the fixed ring of $\alpha$, not $\alpha(R)$ (the latter is $R$ since $\alpha$ is an involution).
Sep 28, 2014 at 22:54 history edited David Handelman CC BY-SA 3.0
added 620 characters in body
Sep 28, 2014 at 20:34 comment added Martin Brandenburg I've just seen your edit. Thank you, I will look at it!
Sep 27, 2014 at 22:26 history edited David Handelman CC BY-SA 3.0
added 295 characters in body
Sep 27, 2014 at 22:07 history edited David Handelman CC BY-SA 3.0
added 80 characters in body
Sep 27, 2014 at 21:57 history edited David Handelman CC BY-SA 3.0
added 3242 characters in body
Sep 27, 2014 at 19:13 comment added Martin Brandenburg In his book "Modules Over Commutative Regular Rings", Pierce studies as an example rings satisfying $a^n=a$ and their corresponding structure sheaves. But does the book also offer a classification?
Sep 27, 2014 at 1:10 comment added Martin Brandenburg Thanks, but that seems to me what I already know. I am interested in a more explicit classification (or even better, an equivalence of categories).
Sep 27, 2014 at 1:02 history answered David Handelman CC BY-SA 3.0