Mathematics

Associated with Math.SE; for both general discussion & math qu...
Mar 9, 2021 01:34
This isn't homework, but it's been bothering me a lot recently
Mar 9, 2021 01:34
Does an algebraic geometer have an opinion on this:
https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/4053116/prime-ideal-after-modding-out-by-homogenizing-variable-implies-original-ideal-pr
Mar 9, 2021 01:29
Are there any algebraic geometers in this chat?
Oct 26, 2019 19:28
$in_<(I)=(xyz)
Oct 26, 2019 19:28
Blergh. I mean, let $I$ be a $k[x,y,z]$-ideal. Suppose $in_<(I)=xyz$. Then is $I$ singular?
Oct 26, 2019 19:27
Woops, I meant, "is the ideal singular"
Oct 26, 2019 19:26
If the initial ideal with respect to a monomial ordering in $k[x,y,z]$ is $xyz$, then is it singular?
Mar 9, 2018 02:22
I want to compute $H_2(D^n\times S^1,S^{n-1}\times S^1)$
Mar 9, 2018 02:18
Anyone understand topology? I have a hard question
Mar 5, 2018 01:52
@MatheinBoulomenos Okay, this is clear now. Thanks!
Mar 5, 2018 01:50
@MatheinBoulomenos Wait, does the degree of $f$ have to divide $p$, or just the degrees of some of the terms of $f$?
Mar 5, 2018 01:46
@MatheinBoulomenos so we would have to have $f$ be some power of $p^k$
Mar 5, 2018 01:45
@MatheinBoulomenos Right...
Mar 5, 2018 01:41
@MatheinBoulomenos Yes
Mar 5, 2018 01:29
@TedShifrin

One last question. In this post: https://math.stackexchange.com/a/70265/94106

Matt E's answer says:
"We may write $f(x)=g(x^{p^d}),f(x)=g(x^{p^d})$, where $g$ is irreducible and separable and $d\geq 0$.

Why is this true?
Mar 5, 2018 00:42
@TedShifrin Thanks!
Mar 5, 2018 00:41
Sweet, To sage I go
Mar 5, 2018 00:39
@TedShifrin I guess I ask this because of this special case:

Suppose $f$ and $g$ are two monic irreducible polynomials over $\mathbb{F}_q$ of degrees $16$ and $20$ respectively. Let $F$ be the splitting field of $fg$ over $\mathbb{F}_q$. Then I want to say that $F$ is really just the composite of $\mathbb{F}_{q^{16}}$ and $\mathbb{F}_{q^{20}}$, which I guess is $\mathbb{F}_{q^{80}}$? So this is a degree $80$ extension?
Mar 5, 2018 00:32
Is what I said hogwash?
Mar 5, 2018 00:30
*$\mathbb{F}_q$
Mar 5, 2018 00:30
Cool. So say I have extensions of $\mathbb{F}$ of degree $m_1$ and degree $m_2$. Does this mean that the composite of these extensions has degree $lcm(m_1,m_2)$?
Mar 5, 2018 00:25
Is it true that a simple extension of $\mathbb{F}_q$ of degree $m$, where $q=p^n$, is isomorphic to $\mathbb{F}_{p^{mn}}$?
Oct 12, 2017 17:17
Sorry for the confusion, and thanks for the clarity
Oct 12, 2017 17:17
I was saying that's why we need the connectedness assumption
Oct 12, 2017 17:16
Yeah, that's what I meant
Oct 12, 2017 17:10
Oh wait! Is another way of saying this that if $X$ is finitely covered at each point, each of these might be different from each other if $X$ is not connected
Oct 12, 2017 17:06
Which I assume is why one would also require path-connectedness
Oct 12, 2017 17:06
but that's confusing because we only want that it is finite, not the same finite number everywhere
Oct 12, 2017 17:05
So that is what I wrote initially, but I convinced myself that was wrong because apparently we need a path-connected assumption...
Oct 12, 2017 17:05
Oh right :)
Oct 12, 2017 17:03
I think that is where my confusion is coming from
Oct 12, 2017 17:03
@BalarkaSen I thought a discrete set is one with the discrete topology. But for a cover, don't we only know that the preimage of an evenly covered open neighborhood $U$ of that point is a disjoint union of $V_i$ where the $V_i$ is homeomorphic to $U$. So why is this disjoint union a discrete set?
Oct 12, 2017 16:56
Always? I assume we need some assumptions on the base space...
Oct 12, 2017 16:56
If a cover is compact, is it finite sheeted?
Dec 2, 2016 16:57
Question: why does any extension of $\mathbb{Q}$ containing a root of $x^6+3$ have to contain a primitive 6th root of unity?
Nov 14, 2016 21:29
@arctictern Revision: I think I understand that the sum decomposition would show the dimension is at least $n$. But I want to show that using the fact that $R$ is simple... where does simplicity come into the argument?
Nov 14, 2016 21:07
@TobiasKildetoft So I think I was considering $M$ as a $\mathbb{C}$-algebra
Nov 14, 2016 21:06
@TobiasKildetoft I want to show that since $R$ is simple as a $\mathbb{C}$-algebra, then any left $R$-module has dimension at least $n$ over $\mathbb{C}$.
Nov 14, 2016 21:05
@TobiasKildetoft It's simple as a $\mathbb{C}$-algebra
Nov 14, 2016 21:04
@arctictern I honestly don't understand how this helps me. I don't know what a tensor product is. My idea was to use the fact that $R=\mathbb{M}_n(\mathbb{C})$ is simple so the only algebra homomorphisms $R\to M$ are either injective or the zero map... then to show a homomorphism to $M=\mathbb{C}^n$. But this seems stronger...
Nov 14, 2016 18:45
@arctictern I'm still confused about matrix algebras. So I can prove that $R=\mathbb{M}_n(\mathbb{C})$ is simple. Since $R$ is a $\mathbb{C}$-algebra, any left $R$-module is a $\mathbb{C}$-vector space. Now I don't see the connection between the dimension of this vector space over $\mathbb{C}$ and the fact that $R$ is simple...
Nov 14, 2016 17:59
Let $\mathbb{M}_n(\mathbb{C})=R$ be the set of all $n\times n$ matrices with entries in $\mathbb{C}$. Then $R$ is a $\mathbb{C}$-algebra. Moreover, $R$ is simple. Then does this imply that any left $R$-module has dimension $n$ over $\mathbb{C}$?
Nov 14, 2016 17:57
I have a question about C-vector spaces
Nov 14, 2016 02:20
I can do that... is that what it means by "simple $\mathbb{C}$-algebra"?
Nov 14, 2016 02:20
I keep confusing myself with the wording of "algebra" and "module"

The question at hand is "Is $\mathbb{M}_n(\mathbb{C})$ a simple $\mathbb{C}$-algebra?" So I thought it was sufficient to prove that for any nonzero $A\in\mathbb{M}_n(\mathbb{C})$, $(A)=\mathbb{M}_n(\mathbb{C})$. Then since the only ideals are the trivial ones, $\mathbb{M}_n(\mathbb{C})$ is simple
Nov 14, 2016 02:04
@arctictern Yeah, I figured it out eventually! Thanks though!
Nov 14, 2016 00:33
Any thoughts on $A_q$ question? :D
Nov 14, 2016 00:26
@arctictern Any ideas?
Nov 14, 2016 00:20
Oh, also there is a condition on $q$: nonzero and not a root of unity
Nov 14, 2016 00:16
Typo: $XY-qYX$