Group Rings and The Zero Divisor Problem
Suppose that G is a group and K is a field. Is the group ring R = K a domain? The identity
shows that an element g of finite order n induces a zero divisor 1−g in R. The zero divisor problem asks whether this is the only obstruction, in other words,
- Given a field K and a torsion-free group G, is it true that K contains no zero divisors?
No countexamples are known, but the problem remains open in general (as of 2007).
For many special classes of groups, the answer is affirmative. Farkas and Snider proved in 1976 that if G is a torsion-free polycyclic-by-finite group and char K = 0 then the group ring K is a domain. Later (1980) Cliff removed the restriction on the characteristic of the field. In 1988, Kropholler, Linnell and Moody generalized these results to the case of torsion-free solvable and solvable-by-finite groups. Earlier (1965) work of Michel Lazard, whose importance was not appreciated by the specialists in the field for about 20 years, had dealt with the case where K is the ring of p-adic integers and G is the pth congruence subgroup of GL(n,Z).
Read more about this topic: Domain (ring Theory)
Famous quotes containing the words group, rings and/or problem:
“We often overestimate the influence of a peer group on our teenager. While the peer group is most influential in matters of taste and preference, we parents are most influential in more abiding matters of standards, beliefs, and values.”
—David Elkind (20th century)
“It is told that some divorcees, elated by their freedom, pause on leaving the courthouse to kiss a front pillar, or even walk to the Truckee to hurl their wedding rings into the river; but boys who recover the rings declare they are of the dime-store variety, and accuse the throwers of fraudulent practices.”
—Administration in the State of Neva, U.S. public relief program. Nevada: A Guide to the Silver State (The WPA Guide to Nevada)
“What happened at Hiroshima was not only that a scientific breakthrough ... had occurred and that a great part of the population of a city had been burned to death, but that the problem of the relation of the triumphs of modern science to the human purposes of man had been explicitly defined.”
—Archibald MacLeish (1892–1982)