Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

In this question, a ring is not supposed to be commutative.

Let $K=\mathbb{Q}[i]$, and $A$ a subalgebra of $\mathcal{M}_n(K)$ (the algebra of $n \times n$ matrices). We suppose $A$ is a division ring. Is $A$ necessarily commutative ?

More generally, if $K$ is an algebraic extension of $\mathbb{Q}$, where $-1$ is a square, is $A$ necessarily commutative ?

If $-1$ is not the sum of three square in $K$, we can construct a division ring, that is an algebraic extension of $K$. The construction is similar to the construction of quaternions over $\mathbb{R}$. So, $A$ is not necessarily commutative in this case.

Thanks in advance.

share|improve this question

1 Answer 1

up vote 2 down vote accepted

The answer to your question is no. More generally, if $K$ is any number field, then for any $n > 1$ there exists a division algebra $D/K$ with center $K$ and $\operatorname{dim}_K D = n^2$. In particular $D$ is not commutative.

If $K$ is not formally real then you can't use the easy trick of choosing a quaternion algebra $\left( \frac{a,b}{K} \right)$ with $a,b$ both negative. But you can still do the $p$-adic analogue of this.

Here first is a general recipe: let $K/\mathbb{Q}$ be any number field, and choose a prime number $p$ which splits completely in $K$ (the set of such primes has positive density). Now choose a division algebra $D_0$ over $\mathbb{Q}$ such that $D_0 \otimes_{\mathbb{Q}} \mathbb{Q}_p$ is still a division algebra. Since $p$ splits completely in $K$, $K$ embeds in $\mathbb{Q}_p$ and thus $D = D_0 \otimes_{\mathbb{Q}} K$ is still a division algebra. (In yet more abstract terms, the Brauer group of any number field is infinite.)

Here is a concrete example: take $D_0$ to be the quaternion algebra $\left( \frac{-2,-5}{\mathbb{Q}} \right)$. This algebra is ramified at $\infty$ and $5$, and $5$ splits in $K =\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{-1})$, so $\left( \frac{-2,-5}{\mathbb{Q(\sqrt{-1})}} \right)$ is still a division algebra.

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks a lot, Pete. –  francis-jamet Dec 6 '11 at 11:50
    
@francis-jamet, just to make sure: The $n$ here does not equal the size of the matrices. Pete Clark's example quaternion algebra can be written as 2x2-matrices, but only with entries coming from a bigger field (that has to be a splitting field). It can, of course, be written as a set of 4x4 matrices with entries from $K=\mathbf{Q}(\sqrt{-1})$. After all, it is a 4-dimensional algebra over $K$, so we can use the left regular representation. –  Jyrki Lahtonen Dec 25 '11 at 13:19

Your Answer

 
discard

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.