BZPEERSource author record
Explore this author’s publications, collaborators and research topics. This catalog record has not been claimed by its author.
Catalog footprint
Published work
Let f:C[x,y]→C[x,y] be a C-algebra endomorphism having an invertible Jacobian. We show that for such f, if, in addition, the group of invertible elements of C[f(x),f(y),x][1/v]⊂C(x,y) is contained in C(f(x),f(y))−0, then f is an automorphism. Here v∈C[f(x),f(y)]−0 is such that y=u/v, with u∈C[f(x),f(y),x]−0. Keller's theorem (in dimension two) follows immediately, since Keller's condition C(f(x),f(y))=C(x,y) implies that the group of invertible elements of C[f(x),f(y),x][1/v] is contained in C(x,y)−0=C(f(x),f(y))−0.
Let F:C[x1,…,xn]→C[x1,…,xn] be a C-algebra endomorphism that has an invertible Jacobian. We bring two ideas concerning the Jacobian Conjecture: First, we conjecture that for all n, the degree of the field extension C(F(x1),…,F(xn))⊆C(x1,…,xn) is less than or equal to dn−1, where d is the minimum of the degrees of the F(xi)'s. If this conjecture is true, then the generalized Jacobian Conjecture is true. Second, we suggest to replace in some known theorems the assumption on the degrees of the F(xi)'s by a similar assumption on the degrees of the minimal polynomials of the xi's over C(F(x1)…,f(xn)); this way we obtain some analogous results to the known ones.
The two dimensional Jacobian Conjecture says that a morphism f:C[x,y]→C[x,y] having an invertible Jacobian, is invertible. We show that a morphism f having an invertible Jacobian is invertible, in each of the following two special cases: The degree of f(x) is ≤2; The (0,1)-degrees or (1,0)-degrees of all monomials in f(x) are of the same parity. In each case there is no restriction on the degree of f(y) nor on the parity of the (0,1)-degrees or (1,0)-degrees of its monomials.
The two-dimensional Jacobian Conjecture says that a C-algebra endomorphism F:C[x,y]→C[x,y] that has an invertible Jacobian is an automorphism. We show that if a C-algebra endomorphism F:C[x,y]→C[x,y] has an invertible Jacobian and if v∈C[F(x),F(y),x] is a product of prime elements of C[F(x),F(y),x], then F is an automorphism, where v is such that y=u/v, where u∈C[F(x),F(y),x].
The famous Jacobian Conjecture asks if a morphism f:K[x,y]→K[x,y] with invertible Jacobian, is invertible (K is a characteristic zero field). A known result says that if K[f(x),f(y)]⊆K[x,y] is an integral extension, then f is invertible. We slightly generalize this known result to the following: If for some "good" λ∈K (in a sense that will be explained) mK[x,y]=K[x,y] for every maximal ideal m of K[f(x),f(y)][x+λy], then f is invertible. We also apply our ideas to the Jacobian Conjecture, without any further assumptions.
The famous Jacobian problem asks: Is a morphism f:C[x,y]→C[x,y] having an invertible Jacobian, invertible? If we add the assumption that C(f(x),f(y))=C(x,y), then f is invertible; this result is due to O. H. Keller (1939). We suggest the following slight generalization of Keller's theorem: If f:C[x,y]→C[x,y] is a morphism having an invertible Jacobian, and if there exist n≥1, a∈C(f(x),f(y))∗ and b∈C(f(x),f(y)) such that (ax+b)n∈C(f(x),f(y)), then f is invertible. A similar result holds for C[x1,…,xm].
The famous Jacobian conjecture asks if a morphism f:K[x,y]→K[x,y] having an invertible Jacobian is invertible (K is a characteristic zero field). We show that if one of the following three equivalent conditions is satisfied, then f is invertible: K[f(x),f(y)][x+y] is normal; K[x,y] is flat over K[f(x),f(y)][x+y]; K[f(x),f(y)][x+y] is separable over K[f(x),f(y)].
The well-known Dixmier conjecture asks if every algebra endomorphism of the first Weyl algebra over a characteristic zero field is an automorphism. We bring a hopefully easier to solve conjecture, called the γ,δ conjecture, and show that it is equivalent to the Dixmier conjecture. Up to checking that in the group generated by automorphisms and anti-automorphisms of A1 all the involutions belong to one conjugacy class, we show that every involutive endomorphism from (A1,γ) to (A1,δ) is an automorphism (γ and δ are two involutions on A1), and given an endomorphism f of A1 (not necessarily an involutive endomorphism), if one of f(X),f(Y) is symmetric or skew-symmetric (with respect to any involution on A1), then f is an automorphism.
The famous Jacobian conjecture asks if an endomorphism f of K[x,y] (K is a characteristic zero field) having a non-zero scalar Jacobian is invertible. Let α be the exchange involution on K[x,y]: α(x)=y and α(y)=x. An α-endomorphism f of K[x,y] is an endomorphism of K[x,y] that preserves the involution α: fα=αf. It was shown that if f is an α-endomorphism of K[x,y] having a non-zero scalar Jacobian, then f is invertible. Based on this, we bring more results that imply that a given endomorphism f having a non-zero scalar Jacobian and additional conditions involving involutions, is invertible.
Let A1(K)=K⟨x,y∣yx−xy=1⟩ be the first Weyl algebra over a characteristic zero field K and let α be the exchange involution on A1(K) given by α(x)=y and α(y)=x. The Dixmier conjecture of Dixmier (1968) asks: Is every algebra endomorphism of the Weyl algebra A1(K) an automorphism? The aim of this paper is to prove that each α-endomorphism of A1(K) is an automorphism. Here an α-endomorphism of A1(K) is an endomorphism which preserves the involution α. We also prove an analogue result for the Jacobian conjecture in dimension 2, called α−JC2.
Dixmier's famous question says the following: Is every algebra endomorphism of the first Weyl algebra, A1(F), where F is a zero characteristic field, an automorphism? Let α be the exchange involution on A1(F): α(x)=y, α(y)=x. An α-endomorphism of A1(F) is an endomorphism which preserves the involution α. Then one may ask the following question, which may be called the "α-Dixmier's problem 1" or the "starred Dixmier's problem 1": Is every α-endomorphism of A1(F) an automorphism?
The aim of this paper is to try to answer Herstein's question concerning simple rings with involution, namely: If R is a simple ring with an involution of the first kind, with dimZ(R)R>4 and $\Char(Z(R))\neq 2$, is it true that S2=R? We shall see that in such a ring R, R=S3. We shall bring two possible criteria, each shows when R=S2. The first criterion: There exist x,y∈S such that xy−yx=0 and xSy⊆S2 ⇔ S2=R. The second criterion: There exist x,y∈S such that xy+yx=0 and xKy⊆S2 ⇔ S2=R. Actually, those results are true without any restriction on the dimension of R over Z(R). In the special case of matrices (with the transpose involution and with the symplectic involution) over a field of characteristic not equal to 2, it is not difficult to find, for example, x,y∈S such that xy−yx=0 and for every s∈S, xsy∈S2. Therefore, proving Herstein's remark that for matrices the answer is known to be positive. Similar results for K6, K4, K+KSK, KS+K2, SKS and S2K can also be found.
An almost PI algebra is a generalisation of a just infinite algebra which does not satisfy a polynomial identity. An almost PI algebra has some nice properties: It is prime, has a countable cofinal subset of ideals and when satisfying ACC(semiprimes), it has only countably many height 1 primes. Consider an affine prime Goldie non-simple non-PI k-algebra R of GK dimension <3, where k is an uncountable field. R is an almost PI algebra. We give some possible additional conditions which make such an algebra primitive. This gives a partial answer to Small's question: Let R be an affine prime Noetherian k-algebra of GK dimension 2, where k is any field. Does it follow that R is PI or primitive? We also show that the center of R is a finite dimensional field extension of k, and if, in addition, k is algebraically closed, then R is stably almost PI.
Research graph
Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.
BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.