Let $R$ be a ring. Since $R$ is also a group then we can talk about the group ring $R[R]$. I want to understand this group ring $R[R]$.

An element $x\in R[R]$ is written as a finite formal sum $$x=r_1s_1+r_2s_2+\cdots+r_ns_n$$ where both $r_i$ and $s_i$ are in $R$ but since the ring $R$ is closed under sum and multiplication, then it is clear that $x\in R$. So can't we just say that the group ring $R[R]$ is equal to $R$?

  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Because it isn't. It's better to use different notation, e.g., a typical element would be $\sum r_i [s_i]$ with multiplication $(r[s])(r'[s'])=rr'[s+s']$ etc. $\endgroup$ – Lord Shark the Unknown Oct 18 '18 at 18:25
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ I'm not sure what motivated the downvoter in this case. There is a point of confusion expressed, sufficient context for us to see clearly what the problem is, and some clear evidence of prior thought. I couldn't find a duplicate either. Seems fine to me. +1 $\endgroup$ – rschwieb Oct 18 '18 at 18:37
  • $\begingroup$ @LordSharktheUnknown Here you identified $[s+s']$ with $[s]+[s']$ ? $\endgroup$ – palio Oct 18 '18 at 18:54
  • $\begingroup$ @palio No, I did not. $\endgroup$ – Lord Shark the Unknown Oct 18 '18 at 20:27
  • $\begingroup$ @LordSharktheUnknown Then shouldn't $(r[s])(r'[s'])=(rr')([s]+[s'])$? where $rr'$ is the product in $R$ and $[s]+[s']$ is the sum in $R$ ? $\endgroup$ – palio Oct 19 '18 at 17:16

It would be better to write elements of $R[R]$ in the form $$x=\sum_{s\in R}r_se^s.$$ Since $e^se^t=e^{s+t}$, multiplication in $R[R]$ captures the group structure of $(R,+)$. It also avoids the confusion you are having.

  • $\begingroup$ in $x=\sum_{s\in R}r_se^s.$ what is $r$ and what is $e$ ? Thanks! $\endgroup$ – palio Oct 18 '18 at 18:41
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ $r_s\in R$ is the coefficient. The symbol $e$ is just that, a formal symbol (which you should think of like the natural base of exponentiation). $\endgroup$ – David Hill Oct 18 '18 at 18:45
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ here is an example where the notation is used: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algebraic_character $\endgroup$ – David Hill Oct 18 '18 at 18:47
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I think we can use this formal exponentiation trick anytime we have a group ring $R[G]$ where $G$ is an abelian group which is denoted additively and this trick makes multiplication in the group ring clear, is this correct ? $\endgroup$ – palio Oct 18 '18 at 18:51
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ yes, that is correct. $\endgroup$ – David Hill Oct 18 '18 at 19:01

It's important to remember that the linear combinations are formal in that the way we write it distinguishes coefficients from generators: the $r_i$'s are coefficients, and the $s_i$'s are basis elements.

Their juxtaposition does not denote multiplication in $R$, but rather that $r_i$ is the coefficient at the base element $s_i$.

One can form a group ring over the additive group $(R,+)$ or a monoid ring over the monoid $(R,\cdot)$, so the notation above is a little ambiguous. It would perhaps be beneficial to just forget that $R$ is a ring and talk about its underlying abelian group $A$ (or use $M$ if you're doing the monoid instead.)


Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

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