Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

• Username
• Password
• Remember me

• Sign in using OpenID
• Remember me

• Forgot your password?
• Apply for membership

2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry book bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration foundation foundations functional-analysis functor gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry graph graphs gravity grothendieck group group-theory harmonic-analysis higher higher-algebra higher-category-theory higher-differential-geometry higher-geometry higher-lie-theory higher-topos-theory homological homological-algebra homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology nforum nlab noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pages pasting philosophy physics pro-object probability probability-theory quantization quantum quantum-field quantum-field-theory quantum-mechanics quantum-physics quantum-theory question representation representation-theory riemannian-geometry scheme schemes set set-theory sheaf sheaves simplicial space spin-geometry stable-homotopy-theory stack string string-theory superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory tqft type type-theory universal variational-calculus

1. • CommentRowNumber1.
   • CommentAuthornLab edit announcer
   • CommentTimeAug 3rd 2022
   • PermaLink
   Author: nLab edit announcer
   Format: MarkdownItexcreating a separate page for semiring to accomodate diverging definitions of semirings in mathematics. The [[rig]] page should be left for discussing the particular semiring with additive and multiplicative identity elements. Anonymous <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/semiring/1">v1</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/semiring">current</a>

   creating a separate page for semiring to accomodate diverging definitions of semirings in mathematics. The rig page should be left for discussing the particular semiring with additive and multiplicative identity elements.

   Anonymous

   v1, current

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthorJ-B Vienney
   • CommentTimeAug 3rd 2022
   • (edited Aug 4th 2022)
   • PermaLink
   Author: J-B Vienney
   Format: MarkdownItexThank you, it's very usefull. The word rng is used for semigroup objects in the category of abelian groups. Thus we could use: - semi-ring for a monoid object in the category of commutative semigroups - semi-rng for semigroup objects in the category of commutative semigroups - rg for semigroup objects in the category of commutative monoids - rig for monoid objects in the category of commutative monoids It seems to make sense once you have understood the logic. However, it doesn't solve the problems for rings.

   Thank you, it’s very usefull. The word rng is used for semigroup objects in the category of abelian groups. Thus we could use:

   • semi-ring for a monoid object in the category of commutative semigroups

   • semi-rng for semigroup objects in the category of commutative semigroups

   • rg for semigroup objects in the category of commutative monoids

   • rig for monoid objects in the category of commutative monoids

   It seems to make sense once you have understood the logic. However, it doesn’t solve the problems for rings.

3. • CommentRowNumber3.
   • CommentAuthorGuest
   • CommentTimeAug 3rd 2022
   • PermaLink
   Author: Guest
   Format: MarkdownItexThere is a similar problem with the definition of an algebra. Given a commutative (unital) ring $R$, are $R$-algebras magma objects in $R$-modules, semigroup objects in $R$-modules, or monoid objects in $R$-modules? The multiplication in Jordan algebras, Lie algebras, and Leibniz algebras are not associative, and neither are they unital. But free algebras on a set of generators are by definition associative and unital. This somewhat carries down to rings, since [[Lie rings]] are defined to be Lie $\mathbb{Z}$-algebras, even though Lie rings are not associative or unital, and rings are by definition associative and unital.

   There is a similar problem with the definition of an algebra. Given a commutative (unital) ring $R$, are $R$-algebras magma objects in $R$-modules, semigroup objects in $R$-modules, or monoid objects in $R$-modules? The multiplication in Jordan algebras, Lie algebras, and Leibniz algebras are not associative, and neither are they unital. But free algebras on a set of generators are by definition associative and unital.

   This somewhat carries down to rings, since Lie rings are defined to be Lie $\mathbb{Z}$-algebras, even though Lie rings are not associative or unital, and rings are by definition associative and unital.

4. • CommentRowNumber4.
   • CommentAuthorGuest
   • CommentTimeAug 3rd 2022
   • PermaLink
   Author: Guest
   Format: MarkdownItexi.e. [[algebra]], [[commutative algebra]], [[associative unital algebra]], [[nonassociative algebra]], and [[nonunital algebra]]

   i.e. algebra, commutative algebra, associative unital algebra, nonassociative algebra, and nonunital algebra

5. • CommentRowNumber5.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeAug 8th 2022
   • (edited Aug 8th 2022)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexAs pointed out in another thread ([here](https://nforum.ncatlab.org/discussion/14926/tropical-semiring/?Focus=101766#Comment_101766)) the following sentence does not make much sense: > The nLab uses the second definition to define a semiring, and the fourth definition to define a [[rig]]. (Firstly there is no such global policy nor could it practically be enforced even if one were to wish for it, and secondly it seems circular in itself that the entry titled "semiring" would effectively refer to itself this way.) So I have replaced this sentence now by what the subsequent sentence suggests was the intent here: > If one adopts the second definition to define a semiring, and the fourth definition to define a [[rig]], then... <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/semiring/4">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/semiring/4">v4</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/semiring">current</a>

   As pointed out in another thread (here) the following sentence does not make much sense:

   The nLab uses the second definition to define a semiring, and the fourth definition to define a rig.

   (Firstly there is no such global policy nor could it practically be enforced even if one were to wish for it, and secondly it seems circular in itself that the entry titled “semiring” would effectively refer to itself this way.)

   So I have replaced this sentence now by what the subsequent sentence suggests was the intent here:

   If one adopts the second definition to define a semiring, and the fourth definition to define a rig, then…

   diff, v4, current