5
$\begingroup$

I'm currently reading Mac Lane's Categories for the working mathematician and I'm having some trouble with the two following exercises from part III.

  • Find (from any given object) an universal arrow to the forgetful functor $\mathbf{Rng}\rightarrow\mathbf{Ab}$ that forgets multiplication (it is important to stress that $\mathbf{Rng}$ means rings with units)
  • Prove the second isomorphism theorem for groups, that is $SN/N\simeq S/S\cap N$ for $S,N\subset G$, $N$ normal in $G$, using only universality.

For the first one, it is just that I am not aware of the name of the mathematical construction: I can guess that the ring $R_{G}$ constructed from $G$ is a kind of ring with a copy of $\mathbb{Z}$ plus all products of elements of $G$, with equivalence relations $(a+b)c=ac+bc$ and $(na)b=a(nb)$ for integer $n$.

(I know for example that if we forget addition instead of multiplication then we get the ring algebra $R[G]$)

For the second one I don't know how to characterise $SN$ and $S\cap N$ in an element-free fashion. I did manage to prove the third isomorphism theorem.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Just to comment that the "forgetting addition" functor maps $R$ to its group of units, so is rather different from the functor here. $\endgroup$ – Kevin Carlson May 29 '15 at 23:29
  • $\begingroup$ @KevinCarlson Doesn't it map $R$ to a semi-group, which need not even be commutative? $\endgroup$ – David Wheeler May 30 '15 at 2:09
  • $\begingroup$ @DavidWheeler There are several different functors, I suppose. We could map to the whole multiplicative semigroup/monoid, as you say, and then the left adjoint is the semigroup algebra. But I've never seen anyone use this one-the group of units functor, which lands in abelian groups just for commutative rings, is more common. $\endgroup$ – Kevin Carlson May 30 '15 at 19:23
3
$\begingroup$

The name of your construction is the tensor algebra, and it's seen more often as the free $k$-algebra on a vector space than as the free ring on an abelian group, as we have here. Anyway, you're right about the construction: $R_G$ has underlying abelian group the direct sum of all the tensor powers $G\otimes...\otimes G$, with product given by concatenation.

The most obvious characterization of $SN$ and $S\cap N$ is as the coproduct and product in the poset of subgroups of $G$. See if that works for you.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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