Questions tagged [abstract-algebra]

For questions about monoids, groups, rings, modules, fields, vector spaces, algebras over fields, various types of lattices, and other such algebraic objects. Associate with related tags like [group-theory], [ring-theory], [modules], etc as necessary. To clarify which topic of abstract algebra is most related to your question and help other users when searching.

Abstract algebra is the study of algebraic objects, i.e. sets endowed with one or more operations on the elements of those sets. In particular, the study of abstract algebra considers the algebraic structures and properties of which such operations induce. It can be considered as the generalization of the study of the algebraic structure of the integers and real numbers (arithmetic), or the study of matrices and vector spaces (linear algebra).

Some algebraic objects are monoids, groups, rings, fields, vector spaces, modules, algebras, and categories, among many other less prominent objects.

Examples

  1. The set of non-negative integers $\mathbb{N} = \{0,1,2,3,\dotsc\}$ is a monoid under the operation $+$.

  2. The integers $\mathbb{Z} = \{\dotsc,-1,0,1,\dotsc\}$ under the binary operation of $+$ form a group.

  3. Furthermore, $\mathbb{Z}$ has the structure of a ring when you consider it as being equipped with both addition and multiplication.

  4. The real numbers $\mathbb{R}$ with their usual addition and multiplication form a field.

  5. The set of $n\times n$ matrices with entries in $\mathbb{R}$ with matrix addition and multiplication form a ring.

  6. The set of $1\times n$ vectors over the real numbers, with vector addition, and multiplication by elements of the $n\times n$ real matrices on the right are an example of a module for the ring of matrices.

In addition to studying the objects themselves, abstract algebra considers homomorphisms between the objects and various constructions and tools, which are useful for studying the objects.

78557 questions
92
votes
8 answers

How do I prove that $x^p-x+a$ is irreducible in a field with $p$ elements when $a\neq 0$?

Let $p$ be a prime. How do I prove that $x^p-x+a$ is irreducible in a field with $p$ elements when $a\neq 0$? Right now I'm able to prove that it has no roots and that it is separable, but I have not a clue as to how to prove it is irreducible.…
92
votes
4 answers

Finite subgroups of the multiplicative group of a field are cyclic

In Grove's book Algebra, Proposition 3.7 at page 94 is the following If $G$ is a finite subgroup of the multiplicative group $F^*$ of a field $F$, then $G$ is cyclic. He starts the proof by saying "Since $G$ is the direct product of its Sylow…
QETU
  • 929
  • 1
  • 7
  • 3
91
votes
7 answers

Intuition in algebra?

My algebra background: I've had 2 undergrad semesters of algebra, a reading course in Galois Theory, a graduate course in commutative algebra and one in algebraic geometry, and I've done (most of) MacLane and Birkhoff's Algebra on my own. The…
Michael Benfield
  • 1,745
  • 13
  • 11
90
votes
1 answer

In categorical terms, why is there no canonical isomorphism from a finite dimensional vector space to its dual?

I've read in several places that one motivation for category theory was to be able to give precise meaning to statements like, "finite dimensional vector spaces are canonically isomorphic to their double duals; they are isomorphic to their duals as…
89
votes
8 answers

Why are groups more important than semigroups?

This is an open-ended question, as is probably obvious from the title. I understand that it may not be appreciated and I will try not to ask too many such questions. But this one has been bothering me for quite some time and I'm not entirely certain…
user23211
87
votes
8 answers

Intuitive meaning of Exact Sequence

I'm currently learning about exact sequences in grad sch Algebra I course, but I really can't get the intuitive picture of the concept and why it is important at all. Can anyone explain them for me? Thanks in advance.
85
votes
9 answers

Terence Tao–type books in other fields?

I have looked at Tao's book on Measure Theory, and they are perhaps the best math books I have ever seen. Besides the extremely clear and motivated presentation, the main feature of the book is that there is no big list of exercises at the end of…
84
votes
5 answers

linear algebra over a division ring vs. over a field

When I was studying linear algebra in the first year, from what I remember, vector spaces were always defined over a field, which was in every single concrete example equal to either $\mathbb{R}$ or $\mathbb{C}$. In Associative Algebra course, we…
Leo
  • 10,166
  • 4
  • 44
  • 76
84
votes
2 answers

Is Lagrange's theorem the most basic result in finite group theory?

Motivated by this question, can one prove that the order of an element in a finite group divides the order of the group without using Lagrange's theorem? (Or, equivalently, that the order of the group is an exponent for every element in the…
lhf
  • 208,399
  • 15
  • 224
  • 525
83
votes
6 answers

Why can't the Polynomial Ring be a Field?

I'm currently studying Polynomial Rings, but I can't figure out why they are Rings, not Fields. In the definition of a Field, a Set builds a Commutative Group with Addition and Multiplication. This implies an inverse multiple for every Element in…
IAE
  • 1,207
  • 1
  • 11
  • 9
82
votes
6 answers

Is $\mathbf{Q}(\sqrt{2}, \sqrt{3}) = \mathbf{Q}(\sqrt{2}+\sqrt{3})$?

Is $\mathbf{Q}(\sqrt{2}, \sqrt{3}) = \mathbf{Q}(\sqrt{2}+\sqrt{3})$ ? $$\mathbf{Q}(\sqrt{2},\sqrt{3})=\{a+b\sqrt{2}+c\sqrt{3}+d\sqrt{6} \mid a,b,c,d\in\mathbf{Q}\}$$ $$\mathbf{Q}(\sqrt{2}+\sqrt{3}) = \lbrace a+b(\sqrt{2}+\sqrt{3}) \mid a,b \in…
Tashi
  • 1,513
  • 1
  • 11
  • 12
81
votes
3 answers

Prove that the set of all algebraic numbers is countable

A complex number $z$ is said to be algebraic if there are integers $a_0, ..., a_n$, not all zero, such that $a_0z^n+a_1z^{n-1}+...+a_{n-1}z+a_n=0$. Prove that the set of all algebraic numbers is countable. The Hint is: For every positive integer…
PandaMan
  • 2,949
  • 2
  • 24
  • 44
80
votes
8 answers

Why do books titled "Abstract Algebra" mostly deal with groups/rings/fields?

As a computer science graduate who had only a basic course in abstract algebra, I want to study some abstract algebra in my free time. I've been looking through some books on the topic, and most seem to 'only' cover groups, rings and fields. Why is…
GeorgW
  • 809
  • 7
  • 3
79
votes
3 answers

Does every Abelian group admit a ring structure?

Given some Abelian group $(G, +)$, does there always exist a binary operation $*$ such that $(G, +, *)$ is a ring? That is, $*$ is associative and distributive: \begin{align*} &a * (b * c) = (a*b) * c \\ &a * (b + c) = a * b + a * c \\ &(a + b) * c…
Mikko Korhonen
  • 23,479
  • 3
  • 54
  • 110
79
votes
7 answers

What is lost when we move from reals to complex numbers?

As I know when you move to "bigger" number systems (such as from complex to quaternions) you lose some properties (e.g. moving from complex to quaternions requires loss of commutativity), but does it hold when you move for example from naturals to…
Юрій Ярош
  • 1,965
  • 10
  • 19