5
$\begingroup$

Let $(M,+,e)$ be a commutative monoid with unit $e$. An element $a\in M$ is called cancellative element if

for any $b,c \in M$ such that $a+b=a+c$ implies that $b=c$.

Let $(\mathbf{N},+,0)$ the commutative monoid of natural numbers.

suppose that

  1. we have two morphisms of monoids $f:(\mathbf{N},+,0)\rightarrow (M,+,e)$ and $g:(M,+,e)\rightarrow (\mathbf{N},+,0) $ such that $g\circ f= id$.
  2. The monoid $(M,+,e)$ is torsion-free.

My question is the following: is the element $a=f(1)$ automatically a cancellative element in $(M,+,e)$ ?

Edit: By torsion-free I do mean that there does not exist a natural number $n>0$ and some element $x\in M-\{e\}$ such that $n x=e$.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ By torsion free you mean that there does not exist a natural number $n$ and some element $x\in M$ such that $n\cdot x=e$? $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 2, 2021 at 1:14
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ The usual definition of torsion free for commutative monoids is na=nb implies a=b. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 2, 2021 at 1:30

2 Answers 2

7
$\begingroup$

The answer is no. Let $U=\{0,1\}$ under multiplication. Let $P$ be the semigroup of positive integers under $+$. Consider $S=P\times U$, the direct product and let $M=S\cup \{I\}$ where $I$ is an adjoined identity. Then $M$ is torsion-free, there is a homomorphism $f\colon \mathbf N\to M$ given by $f(0)=I$ and $f(n)=(n,0)$ for $n>0$ and $g\colon M\to \mathbf N$ with $g(I)=0$ and $g(n,x)=n$ for $n>0$ and $x\in \{0,1\}$ and clearly $gf=1$ but $(1,0)$ is not cancellable.

$\endgroup$
5
$\begingroup$

Consider the monoid $M=\mathbb{N}\times \{0,1\}$ where $$(n,a)*(m,b):=(n+m, a\cdot b).$$ The unit element is $e:=(0,1)$. Note that this monoid is torsion free. Now consider the maps $$g:(M,*,e)\rightarrow (\mathbb{N}, +,0), g(n,a)=n$$ and $f: (\mathbb{N}, +,0) \rightarrow (M,*,e)$ such that $f(0)=e$ and $f(n)=(n,0)$. Then we have $g\circ f=id$, but $f(1)=(1,0)$ is not cancellative as $$ (1,0)*(0,0)=(1,0)=(1,0)*(0,1).$$

$\endgroup$
6
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ You answered with essentially the same construction as me while I was typing it. I just removed $(0,0)$ to make it more torsion-free in that there are no elements generating a finite subsemigroup except the identity. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 2, 2021 at 1:40
  • $\begingroup$ @BenjaminSteinberg: I essentially know nothing about semigroups, thus I also didn't know about idempotents not being considered torsion-free. Surely, you should keep your version :) $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 2, 2021 at 1:47
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @BenjaminSteinberg Thanks, I keep forgetting about idempotens. Do you know a good introductory textbook (or survey paper) on semigroup theory? $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 2, 2021 at 13:24
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It's a pretty big subject and commutative is vastly different than noncommutative. John Howie has a fairly basic book. Well two of them but I think the newer one is better. Peter Higgins has a nice book too. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 2, 2021 at 17:59
  • $\begingroup$ @BenjaminSteinberg Thanks for the reference! $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 3, 2021 at 13:31

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .