• 検索結果がありません。

HIGHER DERIVATIONS ON RINGS AND MODULES PAUL E. BLAND Received 27 June 2001 and in revised form 14 July 2005

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2022

シェア "HIGHER DERIVATIONS ON RINGS AND MODULES PAUL E. BLAND Received 27 June 2001 and in revised form 14 July 2005"

Copied!
15
0
0

読み込み中.... (全文を見る)

全文

(1)

PAUL E. BLAND

Received 27 June 2001 and in revised form 14 July 2005

Letτ be a hereditary torsion theory on ModR and suppose thatQτ: ModRModR is the localization functor. It is shown that for allR-modulesM, every higher derivation defined onMcan be extended uniquely to a higher derivation defined onQτ(M) if and only ifτis a higher differential torsion theory. It is also shown that ifτis a TTF theory andCτ:MMis the colocalization functor, then a higher derivation defined onMcan be lifted uniquely to a higher derivation defined onCτ(M).

1. Introduction

Rim has shown in [16] that under certain conditions a higher antiderivationd:MM can be extended to a higher antiderivation dτ:Qτ(M)Qτ(M), where Qτ: ModR ModR is the localization functor [10] at a hereditary torsion theoryτon ModR. By se- lecting the involution on the ring in the definition of a higher antiderivation to be the identity mapping onR, a higher antiderivationd:MMbecomes a higher derivation as defined by Ribenboim in [15]. Thus Rim’s results, which generalize the results of Golan [9], show that a higher derivationd:MM can be extended to a higher derivation dτ:Qτ(M)Qτ(M) whenever the conditions of his proposition are met. Uniqueness of extensions of higher (anti-) derivations and the necessary and sufficient conditions for the existence of these extensions were not addressed. The purpose of this paper is to intro- duce higher differential torsion theories and to show that a higher derivationd:MM can always be extended uniquely toQτ(M), the module of quotients ofM, if and only if τis a higher differential torsion theory on ModR. We also show that a higher derivation d:MM can be lifted uniquely to the module of coquotientsCτ(M) ofM at a TTF theory on ModR.

Throughout this paperRwill be an associative ring with identity 1, ModRwill denote the category of unitary rightR-modules and all modules and module homomorphisms will be in ModR.

Copyright©2005 Hindawi Publishing Corporation

International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences 2005:15 (2005) 2373–2387 DOI:10.1155/IJMMS.2005.2373

(2)

2. Differential torsion theory

A torsion theoryτon ModRis a pair (T, F) of classes ofR-modules such that the following conditions hold.

(1) TF=0.

(2) IfMN0 is an exact sequence in ModRandMT, thenNT.

(3) If 0MNis an exact sequence in ModRandNF, thenMF.

(4) For eachR-moduleM, there is a short exact sequence 0TMF0 in ModRwithTT andFF.

It follows that the class T is closed under factor modules, direct sums, and extensions, and that F is closed under submodules, direct products, and extensions. A class C ofR- modules is said to beclosed under extensionsif whenever 0M1MM20 is a short exact sequence in ModR andM1andM2are in C, thenM is in C. Modules in T will be calledτ-torsionand those in F are calledτ-torsion-free. EachR-moduleMhas a largest and necessarily uniqueτ-torsion submodule given bytτ(M)=

NSN, where S is the set ofτ-torsion submodules ofM. A torsion theory will be calledhereditaryif T is closed under submodules and it will be calledcohereditaryif F is closed under factor modules.

Standard results and terminology on torsion theory can be found in [4,10] while general information on rings and modules can be found in [2]. Finally, ifN is a submodule of anR-moduleM, then for anyxM, (N:x) will denote the right ideal of Rgiven by {aR|xaN}and (0 :x) is the right ideal{aR|xa=0}.

A nonempty collectionᏲof right ideals ofRis said to be a (Gabriel)filter[8] if the following two conditions hold.

(1) IfKᏲ, then (K:a)Ᏺfor eachaR.

(2) IfI is a right ideal ofRandKᏲis such that (I:a)Ᏺfor eachaK, then IᏲ.

It can be shown that each filter of right ideals ofRalso satisfies the following three conditions.

(3) IfJᏲandKis a right ideal ofRsuch thatJK, thenKᏲ. (4) IfJ,KᏲ, thenJKᏲ.

(5) IfJ,KᏲ, thenJKᏲ.

Ifτis a hereditary torsion theory on ModR, thenᏲτ= {K|Kis a right ideal ofRand R/KT}is a filter. An elementxof anR-moduleM is said to be aτ-torsion elementof Mif there is aKτsuch thatxK=0. The set of allτ-torsion elements ofMis theτ- torsion submoduletτ(M) ofMmentioned earlier. Moreover, anR-moduleMisτ-torsion iftτ(M)=Mandτ-torsion-free iftτ(M)=0. Conversely, ifᏲis a filter of right ideals of Randt(M)= {xM|xK=0 for someK}, thenτ=(T, F) is a hereditary torsion theory on ModR, where T= {M|t(M)=M}and F= {M|t(M)=0}. It follows that there is a one-to-one correspondence between hereditary torsion theories on ModRand filters of right ideals ofR.

An additive mappingδ:RRsuch thatδ(ab)=δ(a)b+aδ(b) for alla,bRis said to be aderivation onRand, given a derivationδ onR, an additive mappingd:MM such thatd(xa)=d(x)a+xδ(a) is aderivation onM. Important to our discussion is the concept of a differential torsion theory, introduced in [5]. Ifδis a derivation onRand Ᏺis a filter of right ideals ofR, thenᏲis called adifferential filter(with respect toδ) if

(3)

for eachKᏲthere is anIᏲsuch thatδ(I)K. Ifτis a hereditary torsion theory on ModR and the corresponding filterᏲτ is a differential filter, thenτ is said to be a differential torsion theory.

Remark 2.1. IfᏲis a differential filter andKᏲ, then there is anIᏲsuch thatδ(I) K. The right idealI can actually be chosen so thatIK. Indeed, ifIᏲis such that δ(I)KandI=IK, thenIᏲ,IK, andδ(I)K.

The following example shows that differential torsion theories do indeed exist. We will see additional examples later.

Example 2.2. If S is a multiplicatively closed set of elements of R that is a right denominator set[12], thenSsatisfies the following conditions.

(1) If (a,s)R×S, then there is a (b,t)R×Ssuch thatat=sb.

(2) Ifsa=0 withsSandaR, thenat=0 for sometS.

Ifδ is a derivation on R, then the set= {K|Kis a right ideal ofRandKS= ∅}

is a filter of right ideals ofR. IfKᏲ, letsKS. Since (δ(s),s)R×S, there is a (b,t)R×Ssuch thatδ(s)t=sb. Nowδ(st)=δ(s)t+(t)=sb+(t)sRK, so if aR, thenδ(sta)=δ(st)a+stδ(a)K. Henceδ(stR)K. ThereforeᏲis a differential filter, so the torsion theory determined byᏲis a differential torsion theory.

The following lemma gives two conditions that characterize differential filters.

Lemma2.3. Letτbe a hereditary torsion theory onModRwith corresponding filterτ. Then the following are equivalent for a derivationδonR.

(1)Ᏺτis a differential filter.

(2)For everyR-moduleM, ifxtτ(M), then there is anIτsuch thatδ(I)(0 :x).

(3)For everyR-moduleM, ifd:MMis a derivation onM, thend(tτ(M))tτ(M).

Proof. (1)(3). If xtτ(M), then there is aKτ such thatxK=0 and anIτ

such thatδ(I)K. Thus ifaIKτ, then we see that 0=d(xa)=d(x)a+xδ(a)= d(x)a. Henced(x)(IK)=0, sod(x)tτ(M).

(3)(2). Ifxtτ(M) andaR, thend(x) andd(xa) are intτ(M). Thus (0 :d(x)) (0 :d(xa))τ. Therefore I =(0 :d(x))(0 :d(xa))τ. If aI, then d(x)a= d(xa)=0, so 0=d(xa)=d(x)a+xδ(a)=xδ(a). Thusδ(a)(0 :x) and we haveδ(I) (0 :x).

(2)(1). IfKτ, then we need to find anIτsuch thatδ(I)K. SinceR/K is τ-torsion, 1 +Ktτ(R/K), so by (2) there is anIτ such thatδ(I)(0 : 1 +K)=K.

3. Higher differential torsion theory

Letnbe a nonnegative integer. Then a family of additive mappingδ= {δi:RR}ni=0, denoted byδ:RR, is said to be ahigher derivation(onR) of ordernprovided that

δi(ab)=δi(a)δ0(b) +δi1(a)δ1(b) +···+δ0(a)δi(b)

=δi(a)b+δi1(a)δ1(b) +···+i(b) (3.1)

(4)

for alla,bRandi=0, 1,...,n, where it is understood thatδ0is the identity mapping on R. Ifδ:RRis a higher derivation of order 1, thenδ1(ab)=δ1(a)b+1(b) for alla,b R, so a higher derivation onRof order 1 gives a derivation onR. Given a higher derivation δ:RRof order n, a family of additive mappings d= {di:MM}ni=0, denoted by d:MM, is ahigher derivation(onM) of ordernif forxMandaR

di(xa)=di(x)δ0(a) +di1(x)δ1(a) +···+d0(x)δi(a)

=di(x)a+di1(x)δ1(a) +···+i(a) (3.2) fori=0, 1,...,nwith the understanding thatd0will always be the identity mapping onM.

A higher derivationd:MMof order 1 givesd1(xa)=d1(x)a+1(a), sodproduces a derivation onM. To simplify terminology, a higher derivation of ordernwill be referred to simply as a derivation of ordern.

Remark 3.1. Ifδ:RRandd:MMare derivations of ordernand 0kn, then ¯δ= {δi:RR}ki=0and ¯d= {di:MM}ki=0are derivations of orderk, where ¯dis taken with respect to ¯δ. This will subsequently be described by saying thatdproduces derivations of orderkfork=0, 1,...,n.

LetᏲbe the filter of right ideals ofRand suppose thatδ:RRis derivation of order n. IfᏲis such that for eachKᏲthere is anIᏲsuch thatδi(I)Kfori=0, 1,...,n, then we will say thatᏲis adifferential filter of ordern. In this setting, the corresponding hereditary torsion theoryτis called adifferential torsion theory of ordern. We now fix the derivationδ:RRof ordernand assume, unless stated otherwise, that every derivation d:MMof ordern, every differential filterᏲof ordern, and every differential torsion theoryτof ordernis taken with respect toδ. Because ofRemark 3.1every differential filter (differential torsion theory) of ordernproduces a differential filter (differential tor- sion theory) of orderkfork=0, 1,...,n.

In the previous section an example of a differential torsion theory was given. Differ- ential torsion theories of ordern can also be shown to exist. In each of the following examplesδ is a derivation onR of ordern. In particular, we also see that each of the following is also a differential torsion theory.

Example 3.2. LetRbe a commutative ring and suppose thatᏲis a filter of ideals ofR. If IᏲ, thenI2Ᏺ, and it follows thatδ0(I2)=I2I. So suppose thatδi(I2)Ifor alli with 0i < n. Ifa,bI, then

δn(ab)=δn(a)b+δn1(a)δ1(b) +···+δ1(a)δn1(b) +n(b) (3.3) which is easily seen to be inI. Sinceδnis additive, we have thatδn(I2)I. ThereforeᏲτ

is a differential filter of ordern, so the corresponding hereditary torsion theory on ModR

is a differential torsion theory of ordern. Thus for a commutative ring every hereditary torsion theory on ModRis a differential torsion theory of ordern.

Example 3.3. Jans has shown in [11] that ifτ=(T, F) is a hereditary torsion on ModR such that T is closed under direct products, then there is an idempotent idealIτsuch

(5)

thatIKfor eachKτ. Using the same procedure as in the previous example, we can show thatδi(I)Kfori=0, 1,...,n. Thusτis a differential torsion theory of ordern.

Example 3.4. IfRis left perfect, then Alin and Armendariz [1] and Dlab [7] have indepen- dently proved that ifτ=(T, F) is a hereditary torsion theory on ModR, then T is closed under direct products. Thus, we see from the previous example that ifRis left perfect, then every hereditary torsion theory on ModRis a differential torsion theory of ordern.

With the definitions of a differential filter of ordernand a differential torsion the- ory of ordernin place, one might expect thatLemma 2.3can be generalized to higher differential filters. The following lemma shows that this is indeed the case.

Lemma3.5. Ifτis a hereditary torsion theory onModRwith corresponding filterτ, then the following are equivalent for an integern0.

(1)Ᏺτis a differential filter of ordern.

(2)For everyR-moduleMand each derivationd:MMof ordern, ifxtτ(M), then there is anIτsuch thatδi(I)(0 :dni(x))fori=0, 1,...,n.

(3)For everyR-moduleM, ifd:MM is a derivation of ordern, thendi(tτ(M)) tτ(M)fori=0, 1,...,n.

Proof. (1)(3). If n=0, then it is trivial that (1)(3), so suppose (1)(3) for every integerk, 0k < n. Now letτbe a differential filter of ordernand suppose thatd:M M is a derivation of ordern. In view ofRemark 3.1,dproduces a derivation{di:M M}ni=01onMof ordern1 and it follows thatᏲτis a differential filter of ordern1. So ifxtτ(M), then the induction hypothesis shows thatd1(x),...,dn1(x)tτ(M). Hence each of

(0 :x),0 :d1(x),0 :d2(x),...,0 :dn1(x) (3.4) is inᏲτ. SinceᏲτis a filter,K= ∩ni=01(0 :di(x))τ, so sinceᏲτis a differential filter of ordern, there is anIτsuch thatδi(I)Kfori=0, 1,...,n. IfaI, then

dn(xa)=dn1(x)δ1(a)= ··· =d1(x)δn1(a)=n(a)=0, (3.5) so

dn(xa)=dn(x)a+dn1(x)δ1(a) +···+d1(x)δn1(a) +n(a) (3.6) givesdn(x)a=0. Therefore,dn(x)I=0, which indicates thatdn(x)tτ(M) and we have (3).

(3)(2). Ifn=0, then (3)(2) is trivial since we can letI=(0 :x). Now suppose that (3)(2) for every integerk, 0k < n, and let (3) hold for n. Ifd:MM is a derivation of ordernandxtτ(M), then since (3) holds forn, we havedi(x)tτ(M) for i=0, 1,...,n. Since{di:MM}ni=01is a derivation onM of ordern1, the induction hypothesis givesIτsuch thatδi(I)(0 :dn1i(x)) fori=0, 1,...,n1. IfaI= I(0 :dn(x))τ, then

dn(xa)=dn(x)a=dn1(x)δ1(a)=dn2(x)δ2(a)= ··· =d1(x)δn1(a)=0, (3.7)

(6)

so

dn(xa)=dn(x)a+dn1(x)δ1(a) +···+d1(x)δn1(a) +n(a) (3.8) becomes

n(a)=0. (3.9)

Henceδn(I)(0 :x), soδi(I)(0 :dni(x)) fori=0, 1,...,n.

(2)(1). It is obvious that (2)(1) whenn=0, so suppose that (2)(1) for every inte- gerksuch that 0k < n. IfKτ, thenR/Kisτ-torsion, so letd= {di:R/KR/K}ki=0, be a derivation onR/Kof orderkfork=0, 1,...,n. Since (2) holds fork=0, 1,...,n1, for each suchkand eachx+KR/Kthere is anIk,xτsuch thatδi(Ik,x)(0 :dki(x+ K)) fori=0, 1,...,k. In particular, for eachx+KR/K, we haveδk(Ik,x)(0 :x+K) for k=0, 1,...,n1. IfaIx=[nk=10Ik,x](0 :dn(x+K))τ, then

0=dn

(x+K)a=dn(x+K)a+dn1(x+K1(a) +···+ (x+K)δn(a)=(x+K)δn(a).

(3.10) Henceδk(Ix)(0 :x+K) fork=0, 1,...,n. Ifx=1, this givesδk(I1)(0 : 1 +K)=Kfor eachk, soτis a differential filter of ordern.

4. Higher derivations and modules of quotients

If τ is a torsion theory on ModR, then an R-module Qτ(M) together with an R- homomorphismϕ:MQτ(M) is said to be alocalizationofMatτprovided that kerϕ and cokerϕareτ-torsion andQτ(M) isτ-injective andτ-torsion-free. AnR-moduleMis said to beτ-injectiveif HomR(,M)=0 preserves short exact sequences 0N1N N20, whereN2is aτ-torsion module. The moduleQτ(M), called themodule of quo- tientsofM, is unique up to isomorphism whenever it can be shown to exist. Ohtake [14]

has shown that a localizationϕ:MQτ(M) exists for everyR-moduleMif and only if the torsion theory is hereditary. It is well known that ifτis hereditary, then we can set Qτ(M)=Eτ(M/tτ(M)), whereEτ(M/tτ(M)) is theτ-injective envelopeofM/tτ(M) [4,10].

Ifη:MM/tτ(M) is the natural surjection andµ:M/tτ(M)Qτ(M) is the canonical injection, thenϕ=µη.

Ifd:MMis a derivation of ordern, then we say thatdcan be extended to a deriva- tiondτ:Qτ(M)Qτ(M) of ordernif the diagram

M ϕ

di

Qτ(M)

dτi

M ϕ Qτ(M)

(4.1)

is commutative fori=0, 1,...,n. We can now show that a derivationd:MM of or- dernhas a unique extension to a derivationdτ:Qτ(M)Qτ(M) of ordernfor every R-moduleM if and only ifτis a differential torsion theory of ordern. This result is es- tablished by the following lemma and proposition.

(7)

Lemma4.1. Let τbe a differential torsion theory of ordernonModR. If a derivationd: MMof orderncan be extended to a derivationdτ:Qτ(M)Qτ(M)of ordern, thendτ is unique.

Proof. LetᏲτbe the differential filter of orderncorresponding toτand suppose thatdτ and ¯dτare derivations of ordernthat extenddtoQτ(M). Then fork, 0kn,dτ, ¯dτ, anddproduce derivationsdτ, ¯dτ, anddof orderkanddτand ¯dτliftd. SinceᏲτis a differential filter of orderk, ifxQτ(M), then byLemma 3.5there areI,Iτsuch thatδi(I)(0 :dτki(x)) andδi(I)(0 : ¯dki(x)) fori=0, 1,...,k. IfaK=IIτ, then for eachkwe see that

0=

dτkd¯τk(xa)

=dkτ(x)a+dkτ1(x)δ1(a) +···+k(a)

d¯kτ(x)ad¯τk1(x)δ1(a)− ··· −k(a)

=

dτk(x)d¯τk(x)a+dτk1(x)d¯kτ1(x)δ1(a) +···+dτ1(x)d¯1τ(x)δi1(a) + [xx]δk(a)

=

dτk(x)d¯k(x)a.

(4.2)

Hence, [dτk(x)d¯τk(x)]K=0, so dkτ(x)d¯kτ(x)tτ(Qτ(M))=0. Thereforedkτ=d¯τk for

k=0, 1,...,nand sodτ=d¯τ.

We can now establish the main result of this section.

Proposition4.2. Letτbe a hereditary torsion theory onModR. Then for everyR-module M, each derivation d:MM of ordern can be extended uniquely to a derivationdτ: Qτ(M)Qτ(M)of ordernif and only ifτis a differential torsion theory of ordern.

Proof. Suppose thatd:MM is a derivation of ordern. If τis a differential torsion theory of ordern, thenτis a differential filter of ordern, so it follows fromLemma 3.5 that di(tτ(M))tτ(M) fori=0, 1,...,n. Hencedcan be extended to a derivationdτ: Qτ(M)Qτ(M) of ordernsince Rim proved in [16] that such an extension exists when di(tτ(M))tτ(M) fori=0, 1,...,n. Uniqueness follows fromLemma 4.1.

Conversely, suppose that every derivation d:MM of order n can be extended uniquely to a derivationdτ:Qτ(M)Qτ(M) of ordern. From the commutative diagram

M ϕ

di

Qτ(M)

dτi

M ϕ Qτ(M)

(4.3)

we see thatϕdi=diτϕfori=0, 1,...,n. So ifxtτ(M)=kerϕ, thenϕdi(x)=0 for each i. This gives di(x)kerϕ=tτ(M) and so we havedi(tτ(M))tτ(M) fori=0, 1,...,n.

Calling onLemma 3.5again, we see thatτis a differential torsion theory of ordern.

Corollary4.3 [5, Proposition 2.3]. Ifτis a hereditary torsion theory onModR, then for everyR-moduleM, each derivationd:MM can be extended uniquely to a derivation

(8)

dτ:Qτ(M)Qτ(M)if and only ifτ is a differential torsion theory. In particular, τ is a differential torsion theory, then the derivationδ:RRextends uniquely to a derivation δτ:Qτ(R)Qτ(R)defined on the ring of the quotients ofR.

Proof. The first part of the corollary is clear if we considerd:MM to be derivation of order 1. Now letM=Rand apply this result to the derivationδ:RRto prove the

second part of the corollary.

One consequence ofProposition 4.2is that for a hereditary torsion theoryτon ModR, the right ideals of the filterᏲτform a test set for determining if derivations onMof order ncan be extended uniquely to derivations onQτ(M) of ordern.

5. Higher derivations and modules of coquotients

We now show that a result similar toProposition 4.2holds for colocalizations of modules whenever they universally exist. Colocalizations have been investigated under various ap- proaches by several authors, for example, see [3,6,13].

AnR-moduleCτ(M) together with anR-linear mappingϕ:Cτ(M)Mis said to be acolocalizationofM atτprovided that kerϕand cokerϕareτ-torsion-free andCτ(M) isτ-torsion andτ-projective. We callCτ(M) themodule of coquotientsofM. We point out thatτis not assumed to be hereditary. When this is the case, a nonzero submodule of aτ-torsion module can beτ-torsion-free, a condition that is only possible for the zero submodule whenτis hereditary.

AnR-moduleM isτ-projectiveif HomR(M,) preserves short exact sequences 0 N1NN20, whereN1is aτ-torsion-free module. Ohtake was also able to show in [14] that a torsion theoryτ is cohereditary if and only if everyR-moduleM has a colocalization atτ. Ifϕ:Cτ(M)M is a colocalization ofM atτ, then there is anR- epimorphismπ:Cτ(M)tτ(M) such that ifµ:tτ(M)M is the canonical injection, thenϕ=µπ. Furthermore, a module of coquotients is unique up to isomorphism when- ever it can be shown to exist.

Ifd:MMis a derivation of ordern, then we say thatdcan be lifted to a derivation dτ:Cτ(M)Cτ(M) of ordernif the diagram

Cτ(M) ϕ

dτi

M

di

Cτ(M) ϕ M

(5.1)

is commutative fori=0, 1,...,n. We will now show that such liftings are always possible at a TTF theoryτon ModR.

Whenτ=(T, F) is cohereditary, the class F ofτis both a torsion and a torsion-free class, and the class F generates a hereditary torsion theoryσ=(F, D) on ModR. The pair (τ,σ) is often referred to as a TTF theory. Jans has shown in [11] that there is a one- to-one correspondence between TTF theories and idempotent idealsI of R. If (τ,σ) is a TTF theory with corresponding idempotent idealI, then the filter determined byσ is

(9)

given byᏲσ= {KR|KI,Ka right ideal ofR}. In this setting,tτ(R)=Iandtτ(M)= MI for eachR-moduleM. We have seen inExample 3.3 thatσ is a higher differential torsion theory although this condition onσ is not a factor in lifting higher derivations d:MMto higher derivationsdτ:Cτ(M)Cτ(M). Sato has shown in [17] that ifτis cohereditary, thenIRIπ Iµ Ris a colocalization ofR, where the mapπ:IRII is given byni=1(aibi)n

i=1aibi. Furthermore,IRI is a ring, possibly without an identity, and an (R,R)-bimodule. Sato also shows in [17] thatMRIRIπ MIµ M is a colocalization ofMatτ, where the mapπ:MRIRIMIis given byni1(xiai bi)n

i=1xiaibi. SinceI is an idempotent ideal,δi(I)Ifori=0, 1,...,nand it follows that each derivationd:MM of ordern is such thatdi(MI)MI fori=0, 1,...,n.

Hence,drestricted toMIproduces a derivationd:MIMIof ordernthat will also be denoted byd.

We now need the following lemma.

Lemma5.1. IfIis an idempotent ideal ofRandd:MMis a derivation of ordern, then the mapρi:M×I×IMRIRIgiven by

ρi(x,a,b)=i

j=0

dij(x) j

k=0

δjk(a)δk(b)

(5.2) isR-balanced fori=0, 1,...,n. That is,ρiis additive in each variable and such thatρi(xr,a,b)

=ρi(x,ra,b)andρi(x,ar,b)=ρi(x,a,rb)for(x,a,b)M×I×IandrR.

Proof. We showρi(xr,a,b)=ρi(x,ra,b). The proof thatρi(x,ar,b)=ρi(x,a,rb) is similar and so is omitted. Expandingij=0dij(xr)[kj=0δjk(a)δk(b)] by the first summa- tion, we have

di(xr) 0

k=0

δ0k(a)δk(b)

+di1(xr) 1

k=0

δ1k(a)δk(b)

+di2(xr) 2

k=0

δ2k(a)δk(b)

+···+xr i

k=0

δik(a)δk(b)

.

(5.3)

Using (5.3) and the definition ofdijforj=0, 1,...,n, we get i

s=0

dis(x)δs(r)

0

k=0

δ0k(a)δk(b)

+ i1

s=0

di1s(x)δs(r)

1

k=0

δ1k(a)δk(b)

+ i2

s=0

di2s(x)δs(r)

2

k=0

δ2k(a)δk(b)

+···+xr i

k=0

δik(a)δk(b)

(5.4)

(10)

which, by shifting subscripts, can be written as i

s=0

dis(x)δs(r)

0

k=0

δ0k(a)δk(b)

+ i

s=1

dis(x)δs1(r)

1

k=0

δ1k(a)δk(b)

+ i

s=2

dis(x)δs2(r)

2

k=0

δ2k(a)δk(b)

+···+xr i

k=0

δik(a)δk(b)

.

(5.5)

Using properties of tensor products, (5.5) becomes i

s=0

dis(x)

0

k=0

δs(r)δ0k(a)δk(b)

+ i

s=1

dis(x)

1

k=0

δs1(r)δ1k(a)δk(b)

+ i

s=2

dis(x)

2

k=0

δs2(r)δ2k(a)δk(b)

+···+x i

k=0

ik(a)δk(b)

.

(5.6)

We now use (5.6) to compute the (it)th term, where 0ti. Each summand [is=udis(x)][uk=0δsu(r)δuk(a)δk(b)] in (5.6) contains an (it)th term until t > u. These terms are

dit(x) 0

k=0

δt(r)δ0k(a)δk(b)

+dit(x) 1

k=0

δt1(r)δ1k(a)δk(b)

+dit(x) 2

k=0

δt2(r)δ2k(a)δk(b)

+···+dit(x) t

k=0

tk(a)δk(b)

.

(5.7)

参照

関連したドキュメント

To prove the second assertion, we use Connes’s joint distribution trick... Check it for polynomials and then approximate f

More precisely, due to the above descriptions it can be easily checked that the convolution and also the involution defined in [5] are well-defined if and only if H is a normal

Using the concept of a mixed g-monotone mapping, we prove some coupled coincidence and coupled common fixed point theorems for nonlinear contractive mappings in partially

Another characterization of weak generalized orthomodular posets among po- sets with a difference having a smallest element is the following one which uses the difference

The proposed reversible watermarking based on multilevel histogram modification and discrete wavelet transform is preferable and provides a higher capacity and higher

Some known results about linearly recursive sequences over base fields are generalized to linearly (bi)recursive (bi)sequences of modules over arbitrary com- mutative ground rings..

In [10], Tansee and Wongwai introduced the dual notion, a right R-module N is called M-principally projective if every R-homomorphism from N to an M -cyclic submodule of M can be

On the tangent bundle of a Riemannian manifold (M, g) we consider a pseudo-Riemannian metric defined by a symmetric tensor field c on M and four real valued smooth functions defined