A ring of generalized power seriesDifferent definitions of Novikov ring?An analogue of rational functions for Hahn seriesmodule of differentials of formal power series ring and of its field of quotiensConstructing the surreal numbers as iterated Hahn seriesInvertible elements in generalized fieldsSaturation of a subalgebra over the Tate-algebra inside the power series ringNon-recursive expression for coefficients of the derivative of the logarithm of a power seriesWhat is the spectrum of the ring $R((x))$ of formal Laurent series over a ring $R$?Rationality of power series whose coefficients are the ranks of a sequence of matricesMeasures on formal power series over a finite fieldIdeal in ring of power seriesOn the product in the power series ring
A ring of generalized power series
Different definitions of Novikov ring?An analogue of rational functions for Hahn seriesmodule of differentials of formal power series ring and of its field of quotiensConstructing the surreal numbers as iterated Hahn seriesInvertible elements in generalized fieldsSaturation of a subalgebra over the Tate-algebra inside the power series ringNon-recursive expression for coefficients of the derivative of the logarithm of a power seriesWhat is the spectrum of the ring $R((x))$ of formal Laurent series over a ring $R$?Rationality of power series whose coefficients are the ranks of a sequence of matricesMeasures on formal power series over a finite fieldIdeal in ring of power seriesOn the product in the power series ring
$begingroup$
Let $Bbbk$ be a field; I am interested in the following ring (which I suspect is a field). Its elements are formal expressions that look like
$$ sum_n=0^infty a_n x^b_n $$
where $a_nin Bbbk$ and $b_nin mathbbR$, with $b_n$ strictly increasing, and $lim_ntoinfty b_n = infty$. (Technically, we should quotient these by some relation allowing us to insert and remove terms where $a_n=0$. Or we could require all the $a_n$'s to be nonzero, but then we'd have to include finite sums as well. Or we could represent them by functions $a : mathbbR to Bbbk$ assigning a coefficient to each exponent, whose support is left-finite.) We can add and multiply these expressions in fairly evident ways; the condition on $b_n$ ensures that multiplication works (i.e. the resulting set of exponents can again be enumerated with order type $omega$ and limit $infty$).
This ring of power-series-like-objects is closely related to some others. Specifically, if $Bbbk=mathbbR$ then it contains the Levi-Civita field as the elements for which each $b_ninmathbbQ$, while it is contained in the Hahn series field $Bbbk[[x^mathbbR]]$. Note that the set of all Hahn series with order type $omega$ is not closed under multiplication; this is a natural subset thereof that is. I believe that it is also the set of Hahn series with order type $omega$ that converge to themselves in the valuation topology of the Hahn series field, and also that it is the closure of the field $Bbbk(x^mathbbR)$ of generalized rational functions inside the Hahn series field, and the Cauchy completion of $Bbbk(x^mathbbR)$ in its valuation uniformity.
Does this field have a standard name and/or a notation? Is it an instance of some more general construction (e.g. replacing $mathbbR$ by something more general, which would presumably then also include the Levi-Civita field as the case of $mathbbQ$)?
ac.commutative-algebra power-series
asked Jul 6 at 9:46
Mike ShulmanMike Shulman
39k4 gold badges90 silver badges240 bronze badges
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let $Bbbk$ be a field; I am interested in the following ring (which I suspect is a field). Its elements are formal expressions that look like
$$ sum_n=0^infty a_n x^b_n $$
where $a_nin Bbbk$ and $b_nin mathbbR$, with $b_n$ strictly increasing, and $lim_ntoinfty b_n = infty$. (Technically, we should quotient these by some relation allowing us to insert and remove terms where $a_n=0$. Or we could require all the $a_n$'s to be nonzero, but then we'd have to include finite sums as well. Or we could represent them by functions $a : mathbbR to Bbbk$ assigning a coefficient to each exponent, whose support is left-finite.) We can add and multiply these expressions in fairly evident ways; the condition on $b_n$ ensures that multiplication works (i.e. the resulting set of exponents can again be enumerated with order type $omega$ and limit $infty$).
This ring of power-series-like-objects is closely related to some others. Specifically, if $Bbbk=mathbbR$ then it contains the Levi-Civita field as the elements for which each $b_ninmathbbQ$, while it is contained in the Hahn series field $Bbbk[[x^mathbbR]]$. Note that the set of all Hahn series with order type $omega$ is not closed under multiplication; this is a natural subset thereof that is. I believe that it is also the set of Hahn series with order type $omega$ that converge to themselves in the valuation topology of the Hahn series field, and also that it is the closure of the field $Bbbk(x^mathbbR)$ of generalized rational functions inside the Hahn series field, and the Cauchy completion of $Bbbk(x^mathbbR)$ in its valuation uniformity.
Does this field have a standard name and/or a notation? Is it an instance of some more general construction (e.g. replacing $mathbbR$ by something more general, which would presumably then also include the Levi-Civita field as the case of $mathbbQ$)?
ac.commutative-algebra power-series
asked Jul 6 at 9:46
Mike ShulmanMike Shulman
39k4 gold badges90 silver badges240 bronze badges
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
This is the completion of $mathbbk(x^mathbbR)$ as a valued field, i.e. the unique up to isomorphism dense valued field extension without proper dense valued field extension.
$endgroup$
– nombre
Jul 6 at 10:29
1
$begingroup$
It is a field because the multiplication is well-defined commutative and the geometric series implies $1+sum_n=1^infty a_n x^b_n, 0 < b_n <b_n+1 to infty$ has an inverse.
$endgroup$
– reuns
Jul 6 at 22:05
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let $Bbbk$ be a field; I am interested in the following ring (which I suspect is a field). Its elements are formal expressions that look like
$$ sum_n=0^infty a_n x^b_n $$
where $a_nin Bbbk$ and $b_nin mathbbR$, with $b_n$ strictly increasing, and $lim_ntoinfty b_n = infty$. (Technically, we should quotient these by some relation allowing us to insert and remove terms where $a_n=0$. Or we could require all the $a_n$'s to be nonzero, but then we'd have to include finite sums as well. Or we could represent them by functions $a : mathbbR to Bbbk$ assigning a coefficient to each exponent, whose support is left-finite.) We can add and multiply these expressions in fairly evident ways; the condition on $b_n$ ensures that multiplication works (i.e. the resulting set of exponents can again be enumerated with order type $omega$ and limit $infty$).
This ring of power-series-like-objects is closely related to some others. Specifically, if $Bbbk=mathbbR$ then it contains the Levi-Civita field as the elements for which each $b_ninmathbbQ$, while it is contained in the Hahn series field $Bbbk[[x^mathbbR]]$. Note that the set of all Hahn series with order type $omega$ is not closed under multiplication; this is a natural subset thereof that is. I believe that it is also the set of Hahn series with order type $omega$ that converge to themselves in the valuation topology of the Hahn series field, and also that it is the closure of the field $Bbbk(x^mathbbR)$ of generalized rational functions inside the Hahn series field, and the Cauchy completion of $Bbbk(x^mathbbR)$ in its valuation uniformity.
Does this field have a standard name and/or a notation? Is it an instance of some more general construction (e.g. replacing $mathbbR$ by something more general, which would presumably then also include the Levi-Civita field as the case of $mathbbQ$)?
ac.commutative-algebra power-series
asked Jul 6 at 9:46
Mike ShulmanMike Shulman
39k4 gold badges90 silver badges240 bronze badges
$endgroup$
Let $Bbbk$ be a field; I am interested in the following ring (which I suspect is a field). Its elements are formal expressions that look like
$$ sum_n=0^infty a_n x^b_n $$
where $a_nin Bbbk$ and $b_nin mathbbR$, with $b_n$ strictly increasing, and $lim_ntoinfty b_n = infty$. (Technically, we should quotient these by some relation allowing us to insert and remove terms where $a_n=0$. Or we could require all the $a_n$'s to be nonzero, but then we'd have to include finite sums as well. Or we could represent them by functions $a : mathbbR to Bbbk$ assigning a coefficient to each exponent, whose support is left-finite.) We can add and multiply these expressions in fairly evident ways; the condition on $b_n$ ensures that multiplication works (i.e. the resulting set of exponents can again be enumerated with order type $omega$ and limit $infty$).
This ring of power-series-like-objects is closely related to some others. Specifically, if $Bbbk=mathbbR$ then it contains the Levi-Civita field as the elements for which each $b_ninmathbbQ$, while it is contained in the Hahn series field $Bbbk[[x^mathbbR]]$. Note that the set of all Hahn series with order type $omega$ is not closed under multiplication; this is a natural subset thereof that is. I believe that it is also the set of Hahn series with order type $omega$ that converge to themselves in the valuation topology of the Hahn series field, and also that it is the closure of the field $Bbbk(x^mathbbR)$ of generalized rational functions inside the Hahn series field, and the Cauchy completion of $Bbbk(x^mathbbR)$ in its valuation uniformity.
Does this field have a standard name and/or a notation? Is it an instance of some more general construction (e.g. replacing $mathbbR$ by something more general, which would presumably then also include the Levi-Civita field as the case of $mathbbQ$)?
ac.commutative-algebra power-series
ac.commutative-algebra power-series
asked Jul 6 at 9:46
Mike ShulmanMike Shulman
39k4 gold badges90 silver badges240 bronze badges
asked Jul 6 at 9:46
Mike ShulmanMike Shulman
39k4 gold badges90 silver badges240 bronze badges
asked Jul 6 at 9:46
Mike ShulmanMike Shulman
39k4 gold badges90 silver badges240 bronze badges
asked Jul 6 at 9:46
Mike ShulmanMike Shulman
39k4 gold badges90 silver badges240 bronze badges
asked Jul 6 at 9:46
Mike ShulmanMike Shulman
39k4 gold badges90 silver badges240 bronze badges
39k4 gold badges90 silver badges240 bronze badges
3
$begingroup$
This is the completion of $mathbbk(x^mathbbR)$ as a valued field, i.e. the unique up to isomorphism dense valued field extension without proper dense valued field extension.
$endgroup$
– nombre
Jul 6 at 10:29
1
$begingroup$
It is a field because the multiplication is well-defined commutative and the geometric series implies $1+sum_n=1^infty a_n x^b_n, 0 < b_n <b_n+1 to infty$ has an inverse.
$endgroup$
– reuns
Jul 6 at 22:05
add a comment |
3
$begingroup$
This is the completion of $mathbbk(x^mathbbR)$ as a valued field, i.e. the unique up to isomorphism dense valued field extension without proper dense valued field extension.
$endgroup$
– nombre
Jul 6 at 10:29
1
$begingroup$
It is a field because the multiplication is well-defined commutative and the geometric series implies $1+sum_n=1^infty a_n x^b_n, 0 < b_n <b_n+1 to infty$ has an inverse.
$endgroup$
– reuns
Jul 6 at 22:05
3
3
$begingroup$
This is the completion of $mathbbk(x^mathbbR)$ as a valued field, i.e. the unique up to isomorphism dense valued field extension without proper dense valued field extension.
$endgroup$
– nombre
Jul 6 at 10:29
$begingroup$
This is the completion of $mathbbk(x^mathbbR)$ as a valued field, i.e. the unique up to isomorphism dense valued field extension without proper dense valued field extension.
$endgroup$
– nombre
Jul 6 at 10:29
1
1
$begingroup$
It is a field because the multiplication is well-defined commutative and the geometric series implies $1+sum_n=1^infty a_n x^b_n, 0 < b_n <b_n+1 to infty$ has an inverse.
$endgroup$
– reuns
Jul 6 at 22:05
$begingroup$
It is a field because the multiplication is well-defined commutative and the geometric series implies $1+sum_n=1^infty a_n x^b_n, 0 < b_n <b_n+1 to infty$ has an inverse.
$endgroup$
– reuns
Jul 6 at 22:05
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I think your ring looks similar to the Novikov ring (see topology papers).
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Following Google to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novikov_ring and thence by an external link back to MO, I found mathoverflow.net/a/13226/49 where my ring is called the "universal Novikov field" (hence I guess it is a field!). Going back to Google, I see that this terminology seems to be common. Unfortunately the most common notation for it is $Lambda$ or $Lambda(Bbbk)$, which works in the context of a particular paper but can't really be a global notation (like $Bbbk[[x]]$) -- for one thing, it clashes with the standard notation for exterior algebras. But a name helps!
$endgroup$
– Mike Shulman
Jul 6 at 15:48
2
$begingroup$
@MikeShulman: Funny: 4 reviewers out of 4 voted to delete this post. It was only you accepting it as an answer that stopped the review process and saved the post.
$endgroup$
– Alex M.
Jul 6 at 17:38
3
$begingroup$
@AlexM. Yes, that is funny. I would argue that those reviewers were being too trigger-happy. Along the lines of meta.stackexchange.com/q/225370, I think this is an answer, and it did contain enough information to lead me to what I wanted to know, even if it would have been nice for it to contain more information to save me the trouble of Googling and following links.
$endgroup$
– Mike Shulman
Jul 6 at 18:00
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "504"
;
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
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f335564%2fa-ring-of-generalized-power-series%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
$begingroup$
I think your ring looks similar to the Novikov ring (see topology papers).
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Following Google to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novikov_ring and thence by an external link back to MO, I found mathoverflow.net/a/13226/49 where my ring is called the "universal Novikov field" (hence I guess it is a field!). Going back to Google, I see that this terminology seems to be common. Unfortunately the most common notation for it is $Lambda$ or $Lambda(Bbbk)$, which works in the context of a particular paper but can't really be a global notation (like $Bbbk[[x]]$) -- for one thing, it clashes with the standard notation for exterior algebras. But a name helps!
$endgroup$
– Mike Shulman
Jul 6 at 15:48
2
$begingroup$
@MikeShulman: Funny: 4 reviewers out of 4 voted to delete this post. It was only you accepting it as an answer that stopped the review process and saved the post.
$endgroup$
– Alex M.
Jul 6 at 17:38
3
$begingroup$
@AlexM. Yes, that is funny. I would argue that those reviewers were being too trigger-happy. Along the lines of meta.stackexchange.com/q/225370, I think this is an answer, and it did contain enough information to lead me to what I wanted to know, even if it would have been nice for it to contain more information to save me the trouble of Googling and following links.
$endgroup$
– Mike Shulman
Jul 6 at 18:00
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I think your ring looks similar to the Novikov ring (see topology papers).
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Following Google to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novikov_ring and thence by an external link back to MO, I found mathoverflow.net/a/13226/49 where my ring is called the "universal Novikov field" (hence I guess it is a field!). Going back to Google, I see that this terminology seems to be common. Unfortunately the most common notation for it is $Lambda$ or $Lambda(Bbbk)$, which works in the context of a particular paper but can't really be a global notation (like $Bbbk[[x]]$) -- for one thing, it clashes with the standard notation for exterior algebras. But a name helps!
$endgroup$
– Mike Shulman
Jul 6 at 15:48
2
$begingroup$
@MikeShulman: Funny: 4 reviewers out of 4 voted to delete this post. It was only you accepting it as an answer that stopped the review process and saved the post.
$endgroup$
– Alex M.
Jul 6 at 17:38
3
$begingroup$
@AlexM. Yes, that is funny. I would argue that those reviewers were being too trigger-happy. Along the lines of meta.stackexchange.com/q/225370, I think this is an answer, and it did contain enough information to lead me to what I wanted to know, even if it would have been nice for it to contain more information to save me the trouble of Googling and following links.
$endgroup$
– Mike Shulman
Jul 6 at 18:00
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I think your ring looks similar to the Novikov ring (see topology papers).
$endgroup$
I think your ring looks similar to the Novikov ring (see topology papers).
answered Jul 6 at 13:47
user142710
$begingroup$
Following Google to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novikov_ring and thence by an external link back to MO, I found mathoverflow.net/a/13226/49 where my ring is called the "universal Novikov field" (hence I guess it is a field!). Going back to Google, I see that this terminology seems to be common. Unfortunately the most common notation for it is $Lambda$ or $Lambda(Bbbk)$, which works in the context of a particular paper but can't really be a global notation (like $Bbbk[[x]]$) -- for one thing, it clashes with the standard notation for exterior algebras. But a name helps!
$endgroup$
– Mike Shulman
Jul 6 at 15:48
2
$begingroup$
@MikeShulman: Funny: 4 reviewers out of 4 voted to delete this post. It was only you accepting it as an answer that stopped the review process and saved the post.
$endgroup$
– Alex M.
Jul 6 at 17:38
3
$begingroup$
@AlexM. Yes, that is funny. I would argue that those reviewers were being too trigger-happy. Along the lines of meta.stackexchange.com/q/225370, I think this is an answer, and it did contain enough information to lead me to what I wanted to know, even if it would have been nice for it to contain more information to save me the trouble of Googling and following links.
$endgroup$
– Mike Shulman
Jul 6 at 18:00
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Following Google to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novikov_ring and thence by an external link back to MO, I found mathoverflow.net/a/13226/49 where my ring is called the "universal Novikov field" (hence I guess it is a field!). Going back to Google, I see that this terminology seems to be common. Unfortunately the most common notation for it is $Lambda$ or $Lambda(Bbbk)$, which works in the context of a particular paper but can't really be a global notation (like $Bbbk[[x]]$) -- for one thing, it clashes with the standard notation for exterior algebras. But a name helps!
$endgroup$
– Mike Shulman
Jul 6 at 15:48
2
$begingroup$
@MikeShulman: Funny: 4 reviewers out of 4 voted to delete this post. It was only you accepting it as an answer that stopped the review process and saved the post.
$endgroup$
– Alex M.
Jul 6 at 17:38
3
$begingroup$
@AlexM. Yes, that is funny. I would argue that those reviewers were being too trigger-happy. Along the lines of meta.stackexchange.com/q/225370, I think this is an answer, and it did contain enough information to lead me to what I wanted to know, even if it would have been nice for it to contain more information to save me the trouble of Googling and following links.
$endgroup$
– Mike Shulman
Jul 6 at 18:00
$begingroup$
Following Google to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novikov_ring and thence by an external link back to MO, I found mathoverflow.net/a/13226/49 where my ring is called the "universal Novikov field" (hence I guess it is a field!). Going back to Google, I see that this terminology seems to be common. Unfortunately the most common notation for it is $Lambda$ or $Lambda(Bbbk)$, which works in the context of a particular paper but can't really be a global notation (like $Bbbk[[x]]$) -- for one thing, it clashes with the standard notation for exterior algebras. But a name helps!
$endgroup$
– Mike Shulman
Jul 6 at 15:48
$begingroup$
Following Google to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novikov_ring and thence by an external link back to MO, I found mathoverflow.net/a/13226/49 where my ring is called the "universal Novikov field" (hence I guess it is a field!). Going back to Google, I see that this terminology seems to be common. Unfortunately the most common notation for it is $Lambda$ or $Lambda(Bbbk)$, which works in the context of a particular paper but can't really be a global notation (like $Bbbk[[x]]$) -- for one thing, it clashes with the standard notation for exterior algebras. But a name helps!
$endgroup$
– Mike Shulman
Jul 6 at 15:48
2
2
$begingroup$
@MikeShulman: Funny: 4 reviewers out of 4 voted to delete this post. It was only you accepting it as an answer that stopped the review process and saved the post.
$endgroup$
– Alex M.
Jul 6 at 17:38
$begingroup$
@MikeShulman: Funny: 4 reviewers out of 4 voted to delete this post. It was only you accepting it as an answer that stopped the review process and saved the post.
$endgroup$
– Alex M.
Jul 6 at 17:38
3
3
$begingroup$
@AlexM. Yes, that is funny. I would argue that those reviewers were being too trigger-happy. Along the lines of meta.stackexchange.com/q/225370, I think this is an answer, and it did contain enough information to lead me to what I wanted to know, even if it would have been nice for it to contain more information to save me the trouble of Googling and following links.
$endgroup$
– Mike Shulman
Jul 6 at 18:00
$begingroup$
@AlexM. Yes, that is funny. I would argue that those reviewers were being too trigger-happy. Along the lines of meta.stackexchange.com/q/225370, I think this is an answer, and it did contain enough information to lead me to what I wanted to know, even if it would have been nice for it to contain more information to save me the trouble of Googling and following links.
$endgroup$
– Mike Shulman
Jul 6 at 18:00
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to MathOverflow!
- 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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f335564%2fa-ring-of-generalized-power-series%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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
3
$begingroup$
This is the completion of $mathbbk(x^mathbbR)$ as a valued field, i.e. the unique up to isomorphism dense valued field extension without proper dense valued field extension.
$endgroup$
– nombre
Jul 6 at 10:29
1
$begingroup$
It is a field because the multiplication is well-defined commutative and the geometric series implies $1+sum_n=1^infty a_n x^b_n, 0 < b_n <b_n+1 to infty$ has an inverse.
$endgroup$
– reuns
Jul 6 at 22:05