Sunday, 20 May 2018

abstract algebra - Is every multiplicative function from the matrix ring textMatn(R) to R a function of textdet?



Suppose that R is a commutative ring with 1, and for nN, let Matn(R) be the set of n×n matrices with entries in R.



It is well known that the determinant function det:Matn(R)R is multiplicative, i.e.



det(AB)=det(A)det(B)




det is certainly not unique in this respect; there are lots of functions g:Matn(R)R which are multiplicative. For a start, there are the constant 1 and constant 0 functions, as well as the indicator function of "is invertible". More strangely, for R=R, are the functions



g(A)={ef(log(|det(A)|))ifdet(A)00ifdet(A)=0




where f:RR is any solution of the Cauchy functional equation f(x+y)=f(x)+f(y) : non-continuous solutions to this equation are really badly behaved.



However, I have not found any examples of multiplicative functions which are not themselves a function of det.



Is there any such function which is not a function of det?



That is, is there a ring R, an nN and g:Matn(R)R which is multiplicative, and not a function of det, i.e. there exist A,BMatn(R) such that



det(A)=det(B)g(A)g(B)


Answer



Suppose R satisfies the following conditions.




  • R has an element x1 with x2=1.

  • There is a surjective ring homomorphism q:RF2.




For example, R=Z and x=1, or R=S×F2 where S has an element s of multiplicative order 2, and x=(s,1).



Then q induces a ring homomorphism Mat2(R)Mat2(F2),
which I'll also denote by q.



An element X of GL2(F2) acts on the three non-zero vectors of F22, and I'll say X is even or odd depending on whether it acts by an even or odd permutation.



There is a multiplicative function g:Mat2(R)R with

g(A)={0if q(A) is not invertible1if q(A) is invertible and evenxif q(A) is invertible and odd.



But g(A) is not a function of det(A), since for A1=(1001) and A2=(1101), det(A1)=det(A2) but g(A1)=1x=g(A2).


No comments:

Post a Comment

real analysis - How to find limhrightarrow0fracsin(ha)h

How to find limh0sin(ha)h without lhopital rule? I know when I use lhopital I easy get $$ \lim_{h\rightarrow 0}...