Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

In our course we introduced the concept of polynomials as a part of a more general construction, namely the monoid ring (or even more general, the monoid algebra) $R[M]$, where $(R,+_R,\cdot_R)$ is a ring and $(M,+_M)$ is a monoid. Then we introduced the notation $R[x]:=R[\mathbb{N}]$. So "$R[x]$" has a precisely defined meaning (Just like $R[\mathbb{Z}]$ or $R[\mathbb{Z}_{12}]$ would have).

So far so good. But now my problem pops up: Somewhat later in the course we suddenly have to deal with $F[u^2,t^3]$, $F[x,x^{-1}]$ etc. (where $F$ is a field)...but these haven't got any meaning associated. We treated $F[u^2,t^3]$, for example, as "polynomials for which we substitute all monomials $x,y$ with $u^2,t^3$". With this explanation I can operate with elements from $F[u^2,t^3]$, but I actually don't know what they are (in opposition to elements from $R[\mathbb{N}]$, which are function $\mathbb{N} \rightarrow R$ that are $0_R$ almost everywhere).

I tried to give some meaning to the above expressions $F[u^2,t^3]$, $F[x,x^{-1}]$ by trying to somehow apply a so-called "evaluation homomorphism" of which I only have a rather vague idea - I think it tells me, when I can use a polynomial as a "pattern" by which I can create other objects, by plugging the new object in place of the "indeterminates" - those would be in my case, I think, again polynomials. So I use a polynomial in which I put another polynomial; but I couldn't make this precise, because at this stage all the concepts are just to fuzzy for me to use them.

Could you please help me clarify what, for example, $F[x^2,x^3]$ really means ("set-theoretically" - just like I specified the elements of $ R[\mathbb{N}]$ above) and why I can work with them in the way described above?

share|cite|improve this question
I think you're right: there are two slightly different notions. The first one is the adjunction of indeterminates to a given (commutative) ring. The second one is this: If $R$ is a ring, if $S$ is a subring, and if $a,b,\dots$ are elements of $R$, then $S[a,b,\dots]$ denotes the subring of $R$ generated by $S$ and $a,b,\dots$ – Pierre-Yves Gaillard Nov 29 '11 at 16:49
From the monoid-ring perspective, the subring $F[u^2,t^2] \subset F[u,t]$ corresponds to the monomial submonoid $\:2\:\mathbb N\times 3\:\mathbb N\subset \mathbb N^2\:.$ So the polynomials,viewed as maps from monomials to coefficients, naturally restict to be viewed as maps from $\:2\:\mathbb N\times 3\:\mathbb N \to F\:.$ – Bill Dubuque Nov 29 '11 at 17:03
You can define $M$ to be the submonoid of $\mathbb N \times \mathbb N$ of elements of the form $(2k,3l)$. Then $F[u^2,t^3]$ is just $F[M]$, and the inclusion $M\rightarrow \mathbb N \times \mathbb N$ yields the natural inclusion $F[M]\rightarrow F[u,t]$ – Thomas Andrews Nov 29 '11 at 17:30
@ThomasAndrews Did you miss my above comment? Yours seems the same. – Bill Dubuque Nov 29 '11 at 18:06
up vote 2 down vote accepted

The most general meaning of $R[\alpha,\beta,\ldots]$ is "the smallest ring that contains $R$ as a subring and also contains the elements $\alpha$, $\beta$, et cetera".

Usually there will be a natural larger ring $R'$ that contains $R$ as subring and also contains $\alpha,\beta,\ldots$ as elements. In that case $R[\alpha,\beta,\ldots]$ is the intersection of all subrings of $R'$ that contain $\{R\}\cup\{\alpha,\beta,\ldots\}$. It is easy to see that this intersection is indeed a subring of $R'$.

  • In the example $F[u^2,t^3]$ it is natural to take $R'$ to be the polynomial ring $F[u][t]$. Then $F[u^2,t^3]$ is the subring of $F[u][t]$ of polynomials where the power of $u$ is always even and the power of $t$ is always a multiple of $3$.

  • For $F[x,x^{-1}]$ one could take $R'$ to be the ring of rational functions in $x$.

  • For $F[x^2,x^3]$ you can take $R'$ to be either the ring of rational functions, or just $F[x]$. Taking $R'$ to be too big usually does not change the answer, as long as it is unambiguous how arithmetic on the $\alpha$s and $\beta$s is supposed to work.

  • The polynomial ring $R[x]$ itself can also be understood as "the smallest ring that contains $R$ and $x$", where $x$ is implicitly understood not to obey any equations but those that follow from the ring axioms and the existing arithmetic in $R$. However, in this case the description does not really work as a construction because we have no a priori existing ring extension for $x$ to be a member of. One could use the ring of "quotients of all formal expressions built from "$x$" and a constant for each member of $R$, by the equivalence relation of all identities that can be proved from the ring axioms and all true statements $a+b=c$ and $ab=c$ with $a,b,c\in R$". But that is something of a mouthful -- the monoid ring is an easier construction.

A different but equivalent way of looking at it is through the evaluation homomorphism. Recall that $R[x,y]$ has the property that any homomorphism $\varphi:R[x,y]\to S$ is determined completely by its restriction to $R$ together with the values of $\varphi(x)$ and $\varphi(y)$. In particular if $R$ is a subring of $S$ and we specify that $\varphi$ must be the identity on $R$, then we only need the values of $\varphi(x)$ and $\varphi(y)$ to specify $\varphi$ completely.

Then $R[\alpha,\beta]$, where $\alpha,\beta\in S$ is just the subring of $S$ that is the image of $R[x,y]$ under the homomorphism that fixes $R$ and takes $x$ to $\alpha$ and $y$ to $\beta$.

share|cite|improve this answer

In general, if $M$ is a monoid, and $M'$ is a sub-monoid, then there is a natural inclusion of $R[M']$ in $R[M]$. Given the ring $F[u,t] = F[\mathbb N \times \mathbb N]$, $F[u^2,t^3]$ is the sub-ring corresponding to the monoid $M'=\{(2k,3l)| k,l\in \mathbb N\}$.

$F[x,x^{-1}]$ can be seen as $F[\mathbb Z]$.

$F[x^2,x^3]$ is just $F[M]$ where $M$ is the sub-monoid of $\mathbb N$ generated by $2$ and $3$ - that is, which is really just $\{n\in \mathbb N: n\neq 1\}$.

share|cite|improve this answer

There are a couple different ways of thinking about it.

If you consider the additive submonoid $M:=\{0,2,3,\cdots\}=(\mathbb{N}\cup\{0\})\setminus \{1\}$ of $\mathbb{N}\cup\{0\}$, then $F[x^2,x^3]$ can be thought of as $F[M]$.

Alternatively, consider the homomorphism $f:F[x,y]\rightarrow F[x]$ where $f(x)=x^2$, $f(y)=x^3$, and $f(\alpha)=\alpha$ for all $\alpha\in F$ (ie $f$ is the evaluation homomorphism taking $x$ to $x^2$ and $y$ to $x^3$--if it isn't clear that $f$ is a ring homomorphism, it would be worth sitting down and proving it). Then $F[x^2,x^3]$ can be thought of as the image of $f$.

share|cite|improve this answer
For the purposes of this problem, $0\in \mathbb N$, or otherwise $\mathbb N$ would not be a monoid under addition. – Thomas Andrews Nov 29 '11 at 17:41

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.