2
$\begingroup$

1. Context

In my lecture notes we defined the term enveloping algebra:

Let $k$ be a field. Let $(A, \mu_A, \eta_A)$ be a unital, associative algebra. We call the algebra $A \otimes A^{opp}$ its enveloping algebra.

Further, there is the notion of a universal enveloping algebra of a Lie algebra:

Let $\mathfrak{g}$ be a Lie algebra. Its universal enveloping algebra is the the quotient $T(\mathfrak{g})/I (\mathfrak{g})$ of the tensor algebra by the two-sided ideal $I(\mathfrak{g})$ generated by all elements of the form $x \otimes y - y \otimes x -[x,y]$ where $x,y \in \mathfrak{g}$.

2. Questions

  • What does $(-)^{opp}$ stand for? Why not leave it away?
  • Is the following correct? The multiplication in $A \otimes A^{opp}$ is given by $\mu_{A \otimes A^{opp}}: (\mu_A \otimes \mu_{A^{opp}})\circ(id_A \otimes \tau \otimes id_{A^{opp}}).$ The unit is given by $\eta_{A \otimes A^{opp}}: (id_A \otimes \tau \otimes id_{A^{opp}})\circ (\eta_A \otimes \eta_{A^{opp}})$. Here we used the identification $k \cong k \otimes k.$ Further, the morphism $\tau: A^{opp} \otimes A \rightarrow A \otimes A^{opp}; v \otimes w \mapsto w \otimes v$ is the twist map.
  • (How) are enveloping and universal enveloping algebra related?
$\endgroup$
4
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ For the opposite algebra $A^{opp}$ see wikipedia. $\endgroup$ Aug 6 '20 at 15:28
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ They're not related. $\endgroup$ Aug 6 '20 at 21:58
  • $\begingroup$ @DietrichBurde Thanks. I think I understand now: We (my lecture notes) are interested in the enveloping algebra $A^e$ as defined above because it gives a correspondence between the category of $A$-bimodules and left $A^e$-modules. That allows us to relate the notion of separable algebra to the notion of projective module (we say: Call a $k$-algebra $A$ separable if it is projective as an $A^e$-module). Now, we define $A^e:=A\otimes A^{opp}$ and not $A^e:=A\otimes A$ because otherwise the correspondence wouldn't exist. That is, given… $\endgroup$
    – M.C.
    Aug 7 '20 at 18:23
  • $\begingroup$ … an $A$-bimodule $B$ the "action" of $A^e$ on $B$ given by $(a_1 \otimes a_2).b:= (a_1.b).a_2$ wouldn't actually define an action/an $A^e$-module structure on $B$. That is, the compatibility between multiplication an action - i.e. $(\alpha \cdot \beta).m=\alpha . (\beta .m)$ - wouldn't be satisfied (easy to check). Analogously, defining $A^e:=A^{opp} \otimes A$ would give a correspondence between the category of $A$-bimodules and right $A^e$-modules. Is my understanding correct? $\endgroup$
    – M.C.
    Aug 7 '20 at 18:23
1
$\begingroup$

Let $A$ be an $k$-algebra. The opposite algebra $A^{\mathrm{opp}}$ (or $A^{\mathrm{op}}$) is given as follows. The underlying vector space of $A^{\mathrm{opp}}$ is the same as the underlying vector space of $A$. Let us denote for every element $a$ of $A$ by $a^{\mathrm{opp}}$ the corresponding (i.e. the same) element of $A^{\mathrm{opp}}$. The multiplication in $A^{\mathrm{opp}}$ is given in this notation by $$ a^{\mathrm{opp}} \cdot b^{\mathrm{opp}} = (b \cdot a)^{\mathrm{opp}} $$ for all $a, b \in A$. The unit of $A^{\mathrm{opp}}$ is then given by $1_{A^{\mathrm{opp}}} = 1_A^{\mathrm{opp}}$. Abstractly speaking, this means that $$ \mu_{A^{\mathrm{opp}}} = \mu_A \circ \tau \,, \quad \eta_{A^{\mathrm{opp}}} = \eta_A $$ where $\tau$ denotes the twist map from $A \otimes A$ to $A \otimes A$.


Given any two $k$-algebras $A$ and $B$ we can make the tensor product $A \otimes B$ again into a $k$-algebra, with multiplication given by $$ (a_1 \otimes b_1) \cdot (a_2 \otimes b_2) = (a_1 a_2) \otimes (b_1 b_2) $$ for all $a_1, a_2 \in A$ and $b_1, b_2 \in B$. The unit of $A \otimes B$ is then given by $$ 1_{A \otimes B} = 1_A \otimes 1_B \,. $$ The multiplication of $A \otimes B$ is thus abstractly given by $$ \mu_{A \otimes B} = (\mu_A \otimes \mu_B) \circ (\mathrm{id}_A \otimes \tau \otimes \mathrm{id}_B) \,, $$ where $\tau$ denotes the twist map from $B \otimes A$ to $A \otimes B$, and the unit of $A \otimes B$ is given by $$ \eta_{A \otimes B} = (\eta_A \otimes \eta_B) \circ \lambda $$ where $\lambda$ is the isomorphism of vector spaces $$ \lambda \colon k \to k \otimes k \,, \quad 1 \mapsto 1 \otimes 1 \,. $$

If we take $B = A^{\mathrm{opp}}$ then the above formula for the multiplication $\mu_{A \otimes A^{\mathrm{opp}}}$ agrees with the one proposed in the question. However, the proposed formula for $\eta_{A \otimes A^{\mathrm{opp}}}$ doesn’t make sense. The map $\eta_A \otimes \eta_{A^{\mathrm{opp}}}$ goes to $A \otimes A^{\mathrm{opp}}$, so we can’t apply $\mathrm{id}_A \otimes \tau \circ \mathrm{id}_{A^{\mathrm{opp}}}$ after that.


I don’t know if there is any connection between the universal enveloping algebra of a Lie algebra and the enveloping algebra of an associative, unitial algebra.


Regarding the comments under your question: Yes, an $A$-bimodule is “the same“ as a left $A^{\mathrm{e}}$-module. More precisely, if $M$ is an $A$-bimodule, then the corresponding left $A^{\mathrm{e}}$-module structure on $M$ is given by $$ (a \otimes b^{\mathrm{opp}}) \cdot m = a \cdot m \cdot b $$ for all $a, b \in A$, $m \in M$. If we would would instead use the definition ${}^{\mathrm{e}} \! A = A^{\mathrm{opp}} \otimes A$ then $A$-bimodules would be the same as right ${}^{\mathrm{e}} \! A$-modules. More precisely, if $M$ is an $A$-bimodule, then the corresponding right ${}^{\mathrm{e}} \! A$-module structure on $M$ is given by $$ m \cdot (a^{\mathrm{opp}} \otimes b) = a \cdot m \cdot b $$ for all $a, b \in A$, $m \in M$

This can also be explained in more general terms: It holds for every $k$-algebra $B$ that right $B$-modules are the same as left $B^{\mathrm{opp}}$-modules. If $M$ is a right $B$-module then the corresponding left $B^{\mathrm{opp}}$-module structure on $M$ is given by $$ b^{\mathrm{opp}} \cdot m = m \cdot b $$ for all $b \in B$ and $m \in M$. We have in our case $$ ( A^{\mathrm{e}} )^{\mathrm{opp}} = ( A \otimes A^{\mathrm{opp}} )^{\mathrm{opp}} = A^{\mathrm{opp}} \otimes (A^{\mathrm{opp}})^{\mathrm{opp}} = A^{\mathrm{opp}} \otimes A = {}^{\mathrm{e}} \! A \,. $$ We therefore find again that \begin{align*} \text{$A$-bimodules} = \text{left $A^{\mathrm{e}}$-modules} = \text{right $( A^{\mathrm{e}} )^{\mathrm{opp}}$-modules} = \text{right ${}^{\mathrm{e}} \! A$-modules}. \end{align*}


However, it needs to be pointed out that the enveloping algebra $A^{\mathrm{e}}$ has the interesting property that it is isomorphic to its own opposite algebra, since $$ ( A^{\mathrm{e}} )^{\mathrm{opp}} = {}^{\mathrm{e}} \! A = A^{\mathrm{opp}} \otimes A \cong A \otimes A^{\mathrm{opp}} = A^{\mathrm{e}} \,. $$ We can therefore interpret every $A$-bimodule not only as a left $A^{\mathrm{e}}$-module and a right ${}^{\mathrm{e}} \! A$-module, but also as a left ${}^{\mathrm{e}} \! A$-module and a right $A^{\mathrm{e}}$-module. For an $A$-bimodule $M$ the corresponding left ${}^{\mathrm{e}} \! A$-module structure is given by $$ (a^{\mathrm{opp}} \otimes b) \cdot m = b \cdot m \cdot a $$ for all $a, b \in A$ and $m \in M$, and the corresponding right $A^{\mathrm{e}}$-module structure is given by $$ m \cdot (a \otimes b^{\mathrm{opp}}) = b \cdot m \cdot a $$ for all $a, b \in A$ and $m \in M$.

$\endgroup$

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.