1
$\begingroup$

Consider a non-associative commutative unital algebra of finite dimension where the product is defined by a Cayley table such that elements are generated with real number coefficients $(a_0, \dotsc, a_n) $ for a basis $\{1, i_1, \dotsc, i_n \}$ and we have a basis so that $ i_k^2 \in \{ -1, +1 \}$.

This implies the answer can be given in the form of a Cayley table for multiplying the finite dimensional basis $\{1, i_1, \dotsc, i_n \}$.

So our algebra is of the form $ a_0 + a_1 i_1 + a_2 i_2 + \dotsb$, addition is as usual and products are defined by a Cayley table relating the basis elements $\{1, i_1, \dotsc, i_n \}$ and we have a basis so that $ i_k^2 \in \{ -1, +1 \}$.

Also the product of two base elements $i_a$ and $i_b$ is never $0$.

Assume the algebra is also power-associative.

One important extra condition:

Let $T$ be such an Algebra.

Let $x$ be an element of $T$. Then $y^2 = x$ always has a solution $y$ within $T$.

So basically the square root is defined in the algebra.

The final condition is that this type of algebra $T$ we seek, is not isomorphic to a tensor product of the complex numbers with another algebra $B$ (taken over the reals).

What are simple or small examples of such "hypercomplex" algebras? What is the smallest dimension one can have?

I know there are methods* to test potential candidates (dimensions or proposed solutions) but they are cumbersome and give no “deeper insights”.

(*they usually involve things like Jacobi matrix or hessian)

I can’t find examples in literature. So I’m not even sure they exist but I hope they do.

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
4
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Your first and third paragraphs seem to say substantially the same thing. \\ Also, the condition that every element has a square root is different from what I would expect when you say "the square root is defined in the algebra"; I would take the latter to mean that there is a distinguished function $\sqrt\cdot : T \to T$ (as your title suggests) satisfying the obvious equation, and possibly some additional conditions. Depending on those additional conditions, this is tronger than what you wrote. $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Mar 22, 2021 at 0:58
  • $\begingroup$ @LSpice : Im a bit confused by your comments. Are you suggesting my question has different interpretations possible ? Or has contradiction or unclear parts ? What is the distinction you are trying to make ? Notice the dimension is finite. $\endgroup$
    – mick
    Mar 22, 2021 at 23:41
  • $\begingroup$ I'm saying that, for example, every element of $\mathbb C$ has a square root, but there is no reasonable sense of a square-root function $\sqrt\cdot : \mathbb C \to \mathbb C$ without making arbitrary and incoherent choices; so I was wondering whether you really just wanted the existence of square roots elementwise, or you wanted a square-root function satisfying certain coherence conditions. \\ As to "Your first and third paragraphs seem to say substantially the same thing", I mean exactly that. I think you can delete the third paragraph with no change in meaning. $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Mar 23, 2021 at 4:33
  • $\begingroup$ @LSpice ah ok. Yeah I agree. I just want the existence of the square root elementwise. And yeah I kinda repeated myself in the third paragraph. It was intented for clarity. $\endgroup$
    – mick
    Mar 23, 2021 at 12:01

0

Reset to default

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.