Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with ra.rings-and-algebras
Search options not deleted
user 11885
Non-commutative rings and algebras, non-associative algebras, universal algebra and lattice theory, linear algebra, semigroups. For questions specific to commutative algebra (that is, rings that are assumed both associative and commutative), rather use the tag ac.commutative-algebra.
5
votes
Does this formula have a rigorous meaning, or is it merely formal?
Hi Dick, I don't know if there is one or another way to give a formal meaning to this formula, but I understand it this way:
We have the identity $\det[X\ Y\ Z] = \langle X, Y \times Z\rangle$, where …
- 2,289