0
$\begingroup$

To define a quotient algebra $\mathcal{A} / I$, with $\mathcal{A}$ an algebra over a field $K$, I thought that $I \subset A$ is a condition which had to be required. However, I read that the exterior algebra is the quotient algebra $\Lambda(V) = T(V) / I(V)$, where $T(V)$ is the tensor algebra, $$ T(V) = \bigoplus_{k = 0}^{\infty} V^{\otimes k} \left(= K \oplus \bigoplus_{k = 1}^{\infty} \left(\bigotimes_{i = 1}^k V\right)\right)\mbox{,} $$ and $I(V)$ is the two-sided ideal generated by elements $v \otimes v$, with $v \in V$. Thus, the condition $I(V) \subset T(V)$ is not clear no me, as an element $v$ in $T(V)$ is of the form $(v_1 , \ldots , v_n , 0 , \ldots)$, where $v_j$ is $V^{\otimes j}$ for all $j = 1 , \ldots , n$ and (as my thought) $$ I(V) = \left\{\sum_{i = 1}^n a_i \otimes (v_i \otimes v_i) \otimes b_i : n \in \mathbb{N}, a_i , b_i \in T(V) \mbox{ and } v_i \in V \mbox{ for all } i = 1 , \ldots , n\right\}\mbox{.} $$ Then I must be wrong in some of my statements because I cannot see any sense to the definition of $\Lambda(V)$. Can you help me? Thank you very much in advance.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

Well, everything you've written is absolutely true.

It looks a bit confusing how you denote elements of $T(V)$ as finite sequences $(v_0, v_1, v_2, \dots, v_n, 0, 0, \dots)$, and elements of $I(V)$ as actual sums of decomposable tensors $\sum a_i \otimes v_i \otimes v_i \otimes b_i$, since these two are actually the same.

Let's refresh what direct sums are. For a sequence $V_i$ of modules (or vector spaces), their direct sum is denoted as $\bigoplus V_i$, and technically consists of sequences $(x_1, x_2, x_3, \dots)$, where $x_i \in V_i$. However, each $V_i$ gets embedded into the direct sum, and, abusing the notation, we can speak about elements of $V_i$ as sitting directly in $\bigoplus V_i$. This way, one also writes the aforementioned sequence as $\sum x_i$, meaning that the $x_i$'s are naturally embedded into $\bigoplus V_i$.

Now, an element of $T(V)$, the latter being the direct sum $\bigoplus V^{\otimes k}$, is a sequence $(x_0, x_1, x_2, \dots)$, but remembering the embedding above, one can also write $\sum x_i$. Here, $x_i \in V^{\otimes i}$.

Finally, consider an element of $I(V)$. It is also a sum of tensors. Specifically, if $a \in V^{\otimes i}$, $b \in V^{\otimes j}$, and $v \in V = V^{\otimes 1}$, then $a \otimes v \otimes v \otimes b \in V^{\otimes (i + j + 2)}$. Thus, the element $a \otimes v \otimes v \otimes b$ sits in the $(i+j+2)$-th position of a sequence as an element of $T(V)$. Note that in the sum $\sum a_i \otimes v_i \otimes v_i \otimes b_i$ there may be several elements of the same tensor rank, thus going to the same position in the sequence after they get summed (as elements of $V^{\otimes n}$).

If $a,b$ are not indecomposable, then decompose them into homogeneous parts: $a = \sum a_i$, $b = \sum b_j$, where, say, $a_i \in V^{\otimes i}$ and $b_j \in V^{\otimes j}$. Then, $a \otimes v \otimes v \otimes b = \sum\limits_i\sum\limits_j a_i \otimes v \otimes v \otimes b_j$, and $a_i \otimes v \otimes v \otimes b_j \in V^{\otimes(i+j+2)}$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ In which way is ''each $V_i$ gets embedded into the direct sum'' true? Do you consider, for instance, the map $j_i : V_i \to \bigoplus_k V_k$, given by $j_i(v) = (0 , \ldots , 0 , \overset{(i)}{v} , 0 , \ldots)$? $\endgroup$ – joseabp91 Apr 26 '18 at 10:11
  • $\begingroup$ @joseabp91 Yes, exactly this map. $\endgroup$ – lisyarus Apr 26 '18 at 11:25
  • $\begingroup$ If $a = \sum_i a_i$ and $b = \sum_j b_j$ are in $T(V)$, the definition $a \otimes b$ is defined by $\sum_i \left(\sum_j (a_i \otimes b_j)\right)$ and it has sense because $a_i \otimes b_j$ is previously defined. But how can you define $a \otimes v$ or $v \otimes b$, with $v \in V$? $\endgroup$ – joseabp91 Apr 26 '18 at 11:44
  • $\begingroup$ @joseabp91 $V$ is the same as $V^{\otimes 1}$ by definition. $\endgroup$ – lisyarus Apr 26 '18 at 12:07
  • $\begingroup$ Yes but the elements in $T(V)$ are of the form $(v_1 , v_2 , \ldots)$, with $v_i \in V^{\otimes i}$. Thus, do you define $a \otimes v$ as $(v_1 \otimes v , v_2 , \ldots)$? $\endgroup$ – joseabp91 Apr 26 '18 at 12:13

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.