Proving this Hall algebra is commutative without Matlis duality The Next CEO of Stack...

Is a distribution that is normal, but highly skewed, considered Gaussian?

Do I need to write [sic] when including a quotation with a number less than 10 that isn't written out?

Calculate the Mean mean of two numbers

What did the word "leisure" mean in late 18th Century usage?

Why did early computer designers eschew integers?

Why did the Drakh emissary look so blurred in S04:E11 "Lines of Communication"?

Ising model simulation

Direct Implications Between USA and UK in Event of No-Deal Brexit

What happens if you break a law in another country outside of that country?

"Eavesdropping" vs "Listen in on"

Calculating discount not working

How to find if SQL server backup is encrypted with TDE without restoring the backup

Read/write a pipe-delimited file line by line with some simple text manipulation

Traveling with my 5 year old daughter (as the father) without the mother from Germany to Mexico

Does Germany produce more waste than the US?

Is it a bad idea to plug the other end of ESD strap to wall ground?

Strange use of "whether ... than ..." in official text

How does a dynamic QR code work?

Is it possible to create a QR code using text?

Find the majority element, which appears more than half the time

Is there a rule of thumb for determining the amount one should accept for a settlement offer?

How can the PCs determine if an item is a phylactery?

How dangerous is XSS

Mathematica command that allows it to read my intentions



Proving this Hall algebra is commutative without Matlis duality



The Next CEO of Stack OverflowCharacterizations of the $p$-Prüfer groupDo all algebraic integers in some $mathbb{Z}[zeta_n]$ occur among the character tables of finite groups?Simplify the category of finite abelian groupsRepresentation problem: I don't understand the setting of the question! (From Serre's book)Representation problem from Serre's bookCharacters of (distinct) irreducible finite-dimensional representations of $A$Kernel of a group character of a finite abelian groupTensor product with Prüfer $p$-groupImage of Young symmetrizer on tensor product decompositionIs a finite centerless metabelian group always a semidirect product of two abelian groups?












4












$begingroup$


For a finite abelian $p$-group $G$ we have that
$$
G simeq mathbf{Z}/(p)^{lambda_1} oplus dotsb oplus mathbf{Z}/(p)^{lambda_r}
$$

for some positive integers $lambda_1 geq dotsb geq lambda_r$. Note that $G$ is uniquely determined by $p$ and this partition $lambda = (lambda_1, dotsc, lambda_r)$, so let's call $lambda$ the type of $G$. For types $lambda$, $mu$, and $nu$, define the Hall number $g_{mu,nu}^lambda(p)$ to be the number of normal subgroups $N mathrel{triangleleft} G$ of type $nu$ such that $G/N$ has type $mu$. These Hall numbers serve as the structure constants of an associative algebra called the Hall algebra.



It turns out that this algebra is commutative, i.e. $g_{mu,nu}^lambda(p) = g_{nu,mu}^lambda(p)$. The proof of this that I'm looking at, following the more general theory in MacDonald's Symmetric Functions and Hall Polynomials, goes like this: You realize that we're looking at the category of finite-length modules over $mathbf{Z}_p$, the $p$-adic integers. The Prüfer $p$-group $mathbf{Z}(p^infty)$ is the injective hull of $boldsymbol{k} = mathbf{Z}/(p)$ in this category, and the functor $mathrm{Hom}({-},mathbf{Z}(p^infty))$, via Matlis duality, gives you a bijection of the short exact sequences in question, so $g_{mu,nu}^lambda(p) = g_{nu,mu}^lambda(p)$.



Proving this can also be approached by developing the theory of characters of finite abelian groups, section 3 in particular. But this is really the same approach in a different language: $mathbf{Z}(p^infty)$ plays the role of $S_1$ in this context. But in either approach, we're introducing some heavy stuff just to prove a fact about $p$-groups and partitions. Is there a elementary way to prove that $g_{mu,nu}^lambda(p) = g_{nu,mu}^lambda(p)$ in the case of finite abelian $p$-groups?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    You can replace $mathbf{Z}left(p^inftyright)$ in the duality argument by its "finite approximation" $mathbf{Z}/p^Nmathbf{Z}$, where $p^N$ is an upper bound on the sizes of your $p$-groups. This makes everything more elementary (it is certainly a lot easier to prove that each group $mathbf{Z}/p^kmathbf{Z}$ is isomorphic to its "$N$-dual" group $operatorname{Hom}left(mathbf{Z}/p^kmathbf{Z},mathbf{Z}/p^Nmathbf{Z}right)$ when $k leq N$).
    $endgroup$
    – darij grinberg
    Feb 22 at 3:57












  • $begingroup$
    Then we don't have to bring up the Prüfer group at all. :) But then we have to do some manual labor to show the map $mathrm{Hom}(G, mathbf{Z}/p^Nmathbf{Z}) to mathrm{Hom}(N, mathbf{Z}/p^Nmathbf{Z})$ is a surjective. And we've still gotta define $mathbf{Z}_p$ because these are all $mathbf{Z}_p$ modules. ... or do you?
    $endgroup$
    – Mike Pierce
    Feb 22 at 4:30












  • $begingroup$
    You don't need to define $mathbf{Z}_p$; you can read "finite abelian $p$-group" for "$mathbf{Z}_p$-module" (since all of your $mathbf{Z}_p$-modules are finite).
    $endgroup$
    – darij grinberg
    Feb 22 at 4:52










  • $begingroup$
    Do you mean $G cong mathbf{Z}/(p)^{lambda_1} oplus dotsb oplus mathbf{Z}/(p^r)^{lambda_r}$?
    $endgroup$
    – Lord Shark the Unknown
    Feb 22 at 5:41








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Yes, that's equivalent to what he is writing. (We always have $left(nright)^k = left(n^kright)$ as ideals.)
    $endgroup$
    – darij grinberg
    Feb 22 at 5:50
















4












$begingroup$


For a finite abelian $p$-group $G$ we have that
$$
G simeq mathbf{Z}/(p)^{lambda_1} oplus dotsb oplus mathbf{Z}/(p)^{lambda_r}
$$

for some positive integers $lambda_1 geq dotsb geq lambda_r$. Note that $G$ is uniquely determined by $p$ and this partition $lambda = (lambda_1, dotsc, lambda_r)$, so let's call $lambda$ the type of $G$. For types $lambda$, $mu$, and $nu$, define the Hall number $g_{mu,nu}^lambda(p)$ to be the number of normal subgroups $N mathrel{triangleleft} G$ of type $nu$ such that $G/N$ has type $mu$. These Hall numbers serve as the structure constants of an associative algebra called the Hall algebra.



It turns out that this algebra is commutative, i.e. $g_{mu,nu}^lambda(p) = g_{nu,mu}^lambda(p)$. The proof of this that I'm looking at, following the more general theory in MacDonald's Symmetric Functions and Hall Polynomials, goes like this: You realize that we're looking at the category of finite-length modules over $mathbf{Z}_p$, the $p$-adic integers. The Prüfer $p$-group $mathbf{Z}(p^infty)$ is the injective hull of $boldsymbol{k} = mathbf{Z}/(p)$ in this category, and the functor $mathrm{Hom}({-},mathbf{Z}(p^infty))$, via Matlis duality, gives you a bijection of the short exact sequences in question, so $g_{mu,nu}^lambda(p) = g_{nu,mu}^lambda(p)$.



Proving this can also be approached by developing the theory of characters of finite abelian groups, section 3 in particular. But this is really the same approach in a different language: $mathbf{Z}(p^infty)$ plays the role of $S_1$ in this context. But in either approach, we're introducing some heavy stuff just to prove a fact about $p$-groups and partitions. Is there a elementary way to prove that $g_{mu,nu}^lambda(p) = g_{nu,mu}^lambda(p)$ in the case of finite abelian $p$-groups?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    You can replace $mathbf{Z}left(p^inftyright)$ in the duality argument by its "finite approximation" $mathbf{Z}/p^Nmathbf{Z}$, where $p^N$ is an upper bound on the sizes of your $p$-groups. This makes everything more elementary (it is certainly a lot easier to prove that each group $mathbf{Z}/p^kmathbf{Z}$ is isomorphic to its "$N$-dual" group $operatorname{Hom}left(mathbf{Z}/p^kmathbf{Z},mathbf{Z}/p^Nmathbf{Z}right)$ when $k leq N$).
    $endgroup$
    – darij grinberg
    Feb 22 at 3:57












  • $begingroup$
    Then we don't have to bring up the Prüfer group at all. :) But then we have to do some manual labor to show the map $mathrm{Hom}(G, mathbf{Z}/p^Nmathbf{Z}) to mathrm{Hom}(N, mathbf{Z}/p^Nmathbf{Z})$ is a surjective. And we've still gotta define $mathbf{Z}_p$ because these are all $mathbf{Z}_p$ modules. ... or do you?
    $endgroup$
    – Mike Pierce
    Feb 22 at 4:30












  • $begingroup$
    You don't need to define $mathbf{Z}_p$; you can read "finite abelian $p$-group" for "$mathbf{Z}_p$-module" (since all of your $mathbf{Z}_p$-modules are finite).
    $endgroup$
    – darij grinberg
    Feb 22 at 4:52










  • $begingroup$
    Do you mean $G cong mathbf{Z}/(p)^{lambda_1} oplus dotsb oplus mathbf{Z}/(p^r)^{lambda_r}$?
    $endgroup$
    – Lord Shark the Unknown
    Feb 22 at 5:41








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Yes, that's equivalent to what he is writing. (We always have $left(nright)^k = left(n^kright)$ as ideals.)
    $endgroup$
    – darij grinberg
    Feb 22 at 5:50














4












4








4


1



$begingroup$


For a finite abelian $p$-group $G$ we have that
$$
G simeq mathbf{Z}/(p)^{lambda_1} oplus dotsb oplus mathbf{Z}/(p)^{lambda_r}
$$

for some positive integers $lambda_1 geq dotsb geq lambda_r$. Note that $G$ is uniquely determined by $p$ and this partition $lambda = (lambda_1, dotsc, lambda_r)$, so let's call $lambda$ the type of $G$. For types $lambda$, $mu$, and $nu$, define the Hall number $g_{mu,nu}^lambda(p)$ to be the number of normal subgroups $N mathrel{triangleleft} G$ of type $nu$ such that $G/N$ has type $mu$. These Hall numbers serve as the structure constants of an associative algebra called the Hall algebra.



It turns out that this algebra is commutative, i.e. $g_{mu,nu}^lambda(p) = g_{nu,mu}^lambda(p)$. The proof of this that I'm looking at, following the more general theory in MacDonald's Symmetric Functions and Hall Polynomials, goes like this: You realize that we're looking at the category of finite-length modules over $mathbf{Z}_p$, the $p$-adic integers. The Prüfer $p$-group $mathbf{Z}(p^infty)$ is the injective hull of $boldsymbol{k} = mathbf{Z}/(p)$ in this category, and the functor $mathrm{Hom}({-},mathbf{Z}(p^infty))$, via Matlis duality, gives you a bijection of the short exact sequences in question, so $g_{mu,nu}^lambda(p) = g_{nu,mu}^lambda(p)$.



Proving this can also be approached by developing the theory of characters of finite abelian groups, section 3 in particular. But this is really the same approach in a different language: $mathbf{Z}(p^infty)$ plays the role of $S_1$ in this context. But in either approach, we're introducing some heavy stuff just to prove a fact about $p$-groups and partitions. Is there a elementary way to prove that $g_{mu,nu}^lambda(p) = g_{nu,mu}^lambda(p)$ in the case of finite abelian $p$-groups?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




For a finite abelian $p$-group $G$ we have that
$$
G simeq mathbf{Z}/(p)^{lambda_1} oplus dotsb oplus mathbf{Z}/(p)^{lambda_r}
$$

for some positive integers $lambda_1 geq dotsb geq lambda_r$. Note that $G$ is uniquely determined by $p$ and this partition $lambda = (lambda_1, dotsc, lambda_r)$, so let's call $lambda$ the type of $G$. For types $lambda$, $mu$, and $nu$, define the Hall number $g_{mu,nu}^lambda(p)$ to be the number of normal subgroups $N mathrel{triangleleft} G$ of type $nu$ such that $G/N$ has type $mu$. These Hall numbers serve as the structure constants of an associative algebra called the Hall algebra.



It turns out that this algebra is commutative, i.e. $g_{mu,nu}^lambda(p) = g_{nu,mu}^lambda(p)$. The proof of this that I'm looking at, following the more general theory in MacDonald's Symmetric Functions and Hall Polynomials, goes like this: You realize that we're looking at the category of finite-length modules over $mathbf{Z}_p$, the $p$-adic integers. The Prüfer $p$-group $mathbf{Z}(p^infty)$ is the injective hull of $boldsymbol{k} = mathbf{Z}/(p)$ in this category, and the functor $mathrm{Hom}({-},mathbf{Z}(p^infty))$, via Matlis duality, gives you a bijection of the short exact sequences in question, so $g_{mu,nu}^lambda(p) = g_{nu,mu}^lambda(p)$.



Proving this can also be approached by developing the theory of characters of finite abelian groups, section 3 in particular. But this is really the same approach in a different language: $mathbf{Z}(p^infty)$ plays the role of $S_1$ in this context. But in either approach, we're introducing some heavy stuff just to prove a fact about $p$-groups and partitions. Is there a elementary way to prove that $g_{mu,nu}^lambda(p) = g_{nu,mu}^lambda(p)$ in the case of finite abelian $p$-groups?







abstract-algebra group-theory representation-theory characters p-groups






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Mar 18 at 16:06







Mike Pierce

















asked Feb 22 at 3:40









Mike PierceMike Pierce

11.7k103585




11.7k103585












  • $begingroup$
    You can replace $mathbf{Z}left(p^inftyright)$ in the duality argument by its "finite approximation" $mathbf{Z}/p^Nmathbf{Z}$, where $p^N$ is an upper bound on the sizes of your $p$-groups. This makes everything more elementary (it is certainly a lot easier to prove that each group $mathbf{Z}/p^kmathbf{Z}$ is isomorphic to its "$N$-dual" group $operatorname{Hom}left(mathbf{Z}/p^kmathbf{Z},mathbf{Z}/p^Nmathbf{Z}right)$ when $k leq N$).
    $endgroup$
    – darij grinberg
    Feb 22 at 3:57












  • $begingroup$
    Then we don't have to bring up the Prüfer group at all. :) But then we have to do some manual labor to show the map $mathrm{Hom}(G, mathbf{Z}/p^Nmathbf{Z}) to mathrm{Hom}(N, mathbf{Z}/p^Nmathbf{Z})$ is a surjective. And we've still gotta define $mathbf{Z}_p$ because these are all $mathbf{Z}_p$ modules. ... or do you?
    $endgroup$
    – Mike Pierce
    Feb 22 at 4:30












  • $begingroup$
    You don't need to define $mathbf{Z}_p$; you can read "finite abelian $p$-group" for "$mathbf{Z}_p$-module" (since all of your $mathbf{Z}_p$-modules are finite).
    $endgroup$
    – darij grinberg
    Feb 22 at 4:52










  • $begingroup$
    Do you mean $G cong mathbf{Z}/(p)^{lambda_1} oplus dotsb oplus mathbf{Z}/(p^r)^{lambda_r}$?
    $endgroup$
    – Lord Shark the Unknown
    Feb 22 at 5:41








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Yes, that's equivalent to what he is writing. (We always have $left(nright)^k = left(n^kright)$ as ideals.)
    $endgroup$
    – darij grinberg
    Feb 22 at 5:50


















  • $begingroup$
    You can replace $mathbf{Z}left(p^inftyright)$ in the duality argument by its "finite approximation" $mathbf{Z}/p^Nmathbf{Z}$, where $p^N$ is an upper bound on the sizes of your $p$-groups. This makes everything more elementary (it is certainly a lot easier to prove that each group $mathbf{Z}/p^kmathbf{Z}$ is isomorphic to its "$N$-dual" group $operatorname{Hom}left(mathbf{Z}/p^kmathbf{Z},mathbf{Z}/p^Nmathbf{Z}right)$ when $k leq N$).
    $endgroup$
    – darij grinberg
    Feb 22 at 3:57












  • $begingroup$
    Then we don't have to bring up the Prüfer group at all. :) But then we have to do some manual labor to show the map $mathrm{Hom}(G, mathbf{Z}/p^Nmathbf{Z}) to mathrm{Hom}(N, mathbf{Z}/p^Nmathbf{Z})$ is a surjective. And we've still gotta define $mathbf{Z}_p$ because these are all $mathbf{Z}_p$ modules. ... or do you?
    $endgroup$
    – Mike Pierce
    Feb 22 at 4:30












  • $begingroup$
    You don't need to define $mathbf{Z}_p$; you can read "finite abelian $p$-group" for "$mathbf{Z}_p$-module" (since all of your $mathbf{Z}_p$-modules are finite).
    $endgroup$
    – darij grinberg
    Feb 22 at 4:52










  • $begingroup$
    Do you mean $G cong mathbf{Z}/(p)^{lambda_1} oplus dotsb oplus mathbf{Z}/(p^r)^{lambda_r}$?
    $endgroup$
    – Lord Shark the Unknown
    Feb 22 at 5:41








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Yes, that's equivalent to what he is writing. (We always have $left(nright)^k = left(n^kright)$ as ideals.)
    $endgroup$
    – darij grinberg
    Feb 22 at 5:50
















$begingroup$
You can replace $mathbf{Z}left(p^inftyright)$ in the duality argument by its "finite approximation" $mathbf{Z}/p^Nmathbf{Z}$, where $p^N$ is an upper bound on the sizes of your $p$-groups. This makes everything more elementary (it is certainly a lot easier to prove that each group $mathbf{Z}/p^kmathbf{Z}$ is isomorphic to its "$N$-dual" group $operatorname{Hom}left(mathbf{Z}/p^kmathbf{Z},mathbf{Z}/p^Nmathbf{Z}right)$ when $k leq N$).
$endgroup$
– darij grinberg
Feb 22 at 3:57






$begingroup$
You can replace $mathbf{Z}left(p^inftyright)$ in the duality argument by its "finite approximation" $mathbf{Z}/p^Nmathbf{Z}$, where $p^N$ is an upper bound on the sizes of your $p$-groups. This makes everything more elementary (it is certainly a lot easier to prove that each group $mathbf{Z}/p^kmathbf{Z}$ is isomorphic to its "$N$-dual" group $operatorname{Hom}left(mathbf{Z}/p^kmathbf{Z},mathbf{Z}/p^Nmathbf{Z}right)$ when $k leq N$).
$endgroup$
– darij grinberg
Feb 22 at 3:57














$begingroup$
Then we don't have to bring up the Prüfer group at all. :) But then we have to do some manual labor to show the map $mathrm{Hom}(G, mathbf{Z}/p^Nmathbf{Z}) to mathrm{Hom}(N, mathbf{Z}/p^Nmathbf{Z})$ is a surjective. And we've still gotta define $mathbf{Z}_p$ because these are all $mathbf{Z}_p$ modules. ... or do you?
$endgroup$
– Mike Pierce
Feb 22 at 4:30






$begingroup$
Then we don't have to bring up the Prüfer group at all. :) But then we have to do some manual labor to show the map $mathrm{Hom}(G, mathbf{Z}/p^Nmathbf{Z}) to mathrm{Hom}(N, mathbf{Z}/p^Nmathbf{Z})$ is a surjective. And we've still gotta define $mathbf{Z}_p$ because these are all $mathbf{Z}_p$ modules. ... or do you?
$endgroup$
– Mike Pierce
Feb 22 at 4:30














$begingroup$
You don't need to define $mathbf{Z}_p$; you can read "finite abelian $p$-group" for "$mathbf{Z}_p$-module" (since all of your $mathbf{Z}_p$-modules are finite).
$endgroup$
– darij grinberg
Feb 22 at 4:52




$begingroup$
You don't need to define $mathbf{Z}_p$; you can read "finite abelian $p$-group" for "$mathbf{Z}_p$-module" (since all of your $mathbf{Z}_p$-modules are finite).
$endgroup$
– darij grinberg
Feb 22 at 4:52












$begingroup$
Do you mean $G cong mathbf{Z}/(p)^{lambda_1} oplus dotsb oplus mathbf{Z}/(p^r)^{lambda_r}$?
$endgroup$
– Lord Shark the Unknown
Feb 22 at 5:41






$begingroup$
Do you mean $G cong mathbf{Z}/(p)^{lambda_1} oplus dotsb oplus mathbf{Z}/(p^r)^{lambda_r}$?
$endgroup$
– Lord Shark the Unknown
Feb 22 at 5:41






1




1




$begingroup$
Yes, that's equivalent to what he is writing. (We always have $left(nright)^k = left(n^kright)$ as ideals.)
$endgroup$
– darij grinberg
Feb 22 at 5:50




$begingroup$
Yes, that's equivalent to what he is writing. (We always have $left(nright)^k = left(n^kright)$ as ideals.)
$endgroup$
– darij grinberg
Feb 22 at 5:50










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















2












$begingroup$

The commutativity of the Hall algebra is saying that you can 'turn short exact sequences around', so is essentially equivalent to having a duality. You don't necessarily need the Prüfer group, though. You can take the 'usual' injective $mathbb Q/mathbb Z$ for abelian groups. Then $mathrm{Hom}_{mathbb Z}(mathbb Z/p^nmathbb Z,mathbb Q/mathbb Z)congmathbb Z/p^nmathbb Z$ is clear, sending a homomorphism $f$ to the image of the cyclic generator $f(1)$.



In the 'algebraic' setting, rather than the 'number theoretic' setting, the same result holds. Here you are taking finite dimensional $k[t]$-modules on which $t$ acts nilpotently; equivalently finite dimensional $k[[t]]$ modules. In this case one can instead use the usual vector space duality $D=mathrm{Hom}_k(-,k)$. When the field $k$ is finite, the corresponding Hall algebra is symmetric.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thank you! And I was just beginning to wonder which other categories give you commutative Hall algebras too.
    $endgroup$
    – Mike Pierce
    Mar 18 at 16:07












Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3122160%2fproving-this-hall-algebra-is-commutative-without-matlis-duality%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









2












$begingroup$

The commutativity of the Hall algebra is saying that you can 'turn short exact sequences around', so is essentially equivalent to having a duality. You don't necessarily need the Prüfer group, though. You can take the 'usual' injective $mathbb Q/mathbb Z$ for abelian groups. Then $mathrm{Hom}_{mathbb Z}(mathbb Z/p^nmathbb Z,mathbb Q/mathbb Z)congmathbb Z/p^nmathbb Z$ is clear, sending a homomorphism $f$ to the image of the cyclic generator $f(1)$.



In the 'algebraic' setting, rather than the 'number theoretic' setting, the same result holds. Here you are taking finite dimensional $k[t]$-modules on which $t$ acts nilpotently; equivalently finite dimensional $k[[t]]$ modules. In this case one can instead use the usual vector space duality $D=mathrm{Hom}_k(-,k)$. When the field $k$ is finite, the corresponding Hall algebra is symmetric.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thank you! And I was just beginning to wonder which other categories give you commutative Hall algebras too.
    $endgroup$
    – Mike Pierce
    Mar 18 at 16:07
















2












$begingroup$

The commutativity of the Hall algebra is saying that you can 'turn short exact sequences around', so is essentially equivalent to having a duality. You don't necessarily need the Prüfer group, though. You can take the 'usual' injective $mathbb Q/mathbb Z$ for abelian groups. Then $mathrm{Hom}_{mathbb Z}(mathbb Z/p^nmathbb Z,mathbb Q/mathbb Z)congmathbb Z/p^nmathbb Z$ is clear, sending a homomorphism $f$ to the image of the cyclic generator $f(1)$.



In the 'algebraic' setting, rather than the 'number theoretic' setting, the same result holds. Here you are taking finite dimensional $k[t]$-modules on which $t$ acts nilpotently; equivalently finite dimensional $k[[t]]$ modules. In this case one can instead use the usual vector space duality $D=mathrm{Hom}_k(-,k)$. When the field $k$ is finite, the corresponding Hall algebra is symmetric.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thank you! And I was just beginning to wonder which other categories give you commutative Hall algebras too.
    $endgroup$
    – Mike Pierce
    Mar 18 at 16:07














2












2








2





$begingroup$

The commutativity of the Hall algebra is saying that you can 'turn short exact sequences around', so is essentially equivalent to having a duality. You don't necessarily need the Prüfer group, though. You can take the 'usual' injective $mathbb Q/mathbb Z$ for abelian groups. Then $mathrm{Hom}_{mathbb Z}(mathbb Z/p^nmathbb Z,mathbb Q/mathbb Z)congmathbb Z/p^nmathbb Z$ is clear, sending a homomorphism $f$ to the image of the cyclic generator $f(1)$.



In the 'algebraic' setting, rather than the 'number theoretic' setting, the same result holds. Here you are taking finite dimensional $k[t]$-modules on which $t$ acts nilpotently; equivalently finite dimensional $k[[t]]$ modules. In this case one can instead use the usual vector space duality $D=mathrm{Hom}_k(-,k)$. When the field $k$ is finite, the corresponding Hall algebra is symmetric.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$



The commutativity of the Hall algebra is saying that you can 'turn short exact sequences around', so is essentially equivalent to having a duality. You don't necessarily need the Prüfer group, though. You can take the 'usual' injective $mathbb Q/mathbb Z$ for abelian groups. Then $mathrm{Hom}_{mathbb Z}(mathbb Z/p^nmathbb Z,mathbb Q/mathbb Z)congmathbb Z/p^nmathbb Z$ is clear, sending a homomorphism $f$ to the image of the cyclic generator $f(1)$.



In the 'algebraic' setting, rather than the 'number theoretic' setting, the same result holds. Here you are taking finite dimensional $k[t]$-modules on which $t$ acts nilpotently; equivalently finite dimensional $k[[t]]$ modules. In this case one can instead use the usual vector space duality $D=mathrm{Hom}_k(-,k)$. When the field $k$ is finite, the corresponding Hall algebra is symmetric.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Mar 18 at 8:33









Andrew HuberyAndrew Hubery

24613




24613












  • $begingroup$
    Thank you! And I was just beginning to wonder which other categories give you commutative Hall algebras too.
    $endgroup$
    – Mike Pierce
    Mar 18 at 16:07


















  • $begingroup$
    Thank you! And I was just beginning to wonder which other categories give you commutative Hall algebras too.
    $endgroup$
    – Mike Pierce
    Mar 18 at 16:07
















$begingroup$
Thank you! And I was just beginning to wonder which other categories give you commutative Hall algebras too.
$endgroup$
– Mike Pierce
Mar 18 at 16:07




$begingroup$
Thank you! And I was just beginning to wonder which other categories give you commutative Hall algebras too.
$endgroup$
– Mike Pierce
Mar 18 at 16:07


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3122160%2fproving-this-hall-algebra-is-commutative-without-matlis-duality%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Nidaros erkebispedøme

Birsay

Was Woodrow Wilson really a Liberal?Was World War I a war of liberals against authoritarians?Founding Fathers...