Taylor's law: Difference between revisions

From formulasearchengine
Jump to navigation Jump to search
en>DrMicro
 
en>Duoduoduo
m hyphenate multi-word adjective
Line 1: Line 1:
Four or five years ago, a reader of some of my columns bought the domain name jamesaltucher.com and gave it to me as a birthday gift. It was a total surprise to me. I didn't even know the reader. I hope one day we meet.<br>Two years ago a friend of mine, Tim Sykes, insisted I had to have a blog. He set it up for me. He even wrote the "About Me". I didn't want a blog. I had nothing to say. But about 6 or 7 months ago I decided I wanted to take this blog seriously. I kept putting off changing the "About Me" which was no longer really about me and maybe never was.<br>A few weeks ago I did a chapter in one of the books in Seth Godin's "The Domino Project". The book is out and called "No Idling". Mohit Pawar organized it (here's Mohit's blog) and sent me a bunch of questions recently. It's intended to be an interview on his blog but I hope Mohit forgives me because I want to use it as my new "About Me" also.<br>1. You are a trader, investor, writer, and entrepreneur? Which of these roles you enjoy the most and why?<br>When I first moved to New York City in 1994 I wanted to be everything to everyone. I had spent the six years prior to that writing a bunch of unpublished novels and unpublished short stories. I must've sent out 100s of stories to literary journals. I got form rejections from every publisher, journal, and agent I sent my novels and stories to.<br>Now, in 1994, everything was possible. The money was in NYC. Media was here. I lived in my 10�10 room and pulled suits out of a garbage bag every morning but it didn't matter...the internet was revving up and I knew how to build a website. One of the few in the city. My sister warned me though: nobody here is your friend. Everybody wants something<br>
In [[commutative algebra]] and [[algebraic geometry]], the '''localization''' is a formal way to introduce the "denominators" to given a ring or a module. That is, it introduces a new ring/module out of an existing one so that it consists of [[algebraic fraction|fractions]]
And I wanted something. I wanted the fleeting feelings of success, for the first time ever, in order to feel better about myself. I wanted a girl next to me. I wanted to build and sell companies and finally prove to everyone I was the smartest. I wanted to do a TV show. I wanted to write books<br>
:<math>\frac{m}{s}</math>.
But everything involved having a master. Clients. Employers. Investors. Publishers. The market (the deadliest master of all). Employees. I was a slave to everyone for so many years. And the more shackles I had on, the lonelier I got<br>
where the [[denominator]]s ''s'' range in a given subset ''S'' of ''R''. The basic example is the construction of the ring '''Q''' of rational numbers from the ring '''Z''' of rational integers.
(Me in the Fortress of Solitude<br>
Much of the time, even when I had those moments of success, I didn't know how to turn it into a better life. I felt ugly and then later, I felt stupid when I would let the success dribble away down the sink<br>
I love writing because every now and then that ugliness turns into honesty. When I write, I'm only a slave to myself. When I do all of those other things you ask about, I'm a slave to everyone else<br>
Some links<br>
33 Unusual Tips to Being a Better Write<br>
"The Tooth<br>
(one of my favorite posts on my blog<br><br>
2. What inspires you to get up and start working/writing every day<br>
The other day I had breakfast with a fascinating guy who had just sold a piece of his fund of funds. He told me what "fracking" was and how the US was going to be a major oil player again. We spoke for two hours about a wide range of topics, including what happens when we can finally implant a google chip in our brains<br>
After that I had to go onto NPR because I firmly believe that in one important respect we are degenerating as a country - we are graduating a generation of indentured servants who will spend 50 years or more paying down their student debt rather than starting companies and curing cancer. So maybe I made a difference<br>
Then I had lunch with a guy I hadn't seen in ten years. In those ten years he had gone to jail and now I was finally taking the time to forgive him for something he never did to me. I felt bad I hadn't helped him when he was at his low point. Then I came home and watched my kid play clarinet at her school. Then I read until I fell asleep. Today I did nothing but write. Both days inspired me<br>
It also inspires me that I'm being asked these questions. Whenever anyone asks me to do anything I'm infinitely grateful. Why me? I feel lucky. I like it when someone cares what I think. I'll write and do things as long as anyone cares. I honestly probably wouldn't write if nobody cared. I don't have enough humility for that, I'm ashamed to admit<br><br>


The technique has become fundamental, particularly in [[algebraic geometry]], as it provides a natural link to [[sheaf (mathematics)|sheaf]] theory. In fact, the term ''localization'' originates in [[algebraic geometry]]: if ''R'' is a ring of [[function (mathematics)|function]]s defined on some geometric object ([[algebraic variety]]) ''V'', and one wants to study this variety "locally" near a point ''p'', then one considers the set ''S'' of all functions which are not zero at ''p'' and localizes ''R'' with respect to ''S''. The resulting ring ''R*'' contains only information about the behavior of ''V'' near ''p''. Cf. the example given at [[local ring]].


3. Your new book "How to be the luckiest person alive" has just come out. What is it about<br>
<!-- Somehow this paragraph is cryptic to me. Is this really important/helpful? -- Taku
When I was a kid I thought I needed certain things: a college education from a great school, a great home, a lot of money, someone who would love me with ease. I wanted people to think I was smart. I wanted people to think I was even special.  And as I grew older more and more goals got added to the list: a high chess rating, a published book, perfect weather, good friends,  respect in various fields, etc. I lied to myself that I needed these things to be happy. The world was going to work hard to give me these things, I thought. But it turned out the world owed me no favors<br>
In [[number theory]] and [[algebraic topology]], one refers to the behavior of a ring or space ''at'' a number ''n'' or ''away'' from ''n''. "Away from ''n''" means "in a ring where ''n'' is invertible" (so a '''Z'''[1/n]-algebra). For instance, for a field, "away from ''p''" means "characteristic not equal to ''p''". '''Z'''[1/2] is "away from 2", but '''F'''<sub>2</sub> or '''Z''' are not.-->
And gradually, over time, I lost everything I had ever gained. Several times.  I've paced at night so many times wondering what the hell was I going to do next or trying not to care. The book is about regaining your sanity, regaining your happiness, finding luck in all the little pockets of life that people forget about. It's about turning away from the religion you've been hypnotized into believing into the religion you can find inside yourself every moment of the day<br><br>
An important related process is [[Completion (ring theory)|completion]]: one often localizes a ring/module, then completes.
[Note: in a few days I'm going to do a post on self-publishing and also how to get the ebook for free. The link above is to the paperback. Kindle should be ready soon also.<br>
 
Related link: Why I Write Books Even Though I've Lost Money On Every Book I've Ever Writte<br>
In this article, a ring is commutative with unity.
4. Is it possible to accelerate success? If yes, how<br><br><br>
 
Yes, and it's the only way I know actually to achieve success. Its by following the Daily Practice I outline in this post:<br>
== Construction ==
It's the only way I know to exercise every muscle from the inside of you to the outside of you. I firmly believe that happiness starts with that practice<br>
 
5. You say that discipline, persistence and psychology are important if one has to achieve success. How can one work on improving "psychology" part<br>
=== Localization of a ring ===
Success doesn't really mean anything. People want to be happy in a harsh and unforgiving world. It's very difficult. We're so lucky most of us live in countries without major wars. Our kids aren't getting killed by random gunfire. We all have cell phones. We all can communicate with each other on the Internet. We have Google to catalog every piece of information in history!  We are so amazingly lucky already<br>
Given a ring ''R'' and a subset ''S'', one wants to construct some ring ''R*'' and [[ring homomorphism]] from ''R'' to ''R*'', such that the image of ''S'' consists of ''[[Unit (ring theory)|units]]'' (invertible elements) in ''R*''. Further one wants ''R*'' to be the 'best possible' or 'most general' way to do this &ndash; in the usual fashion this should be expressed by a [[universal property]].
How can it be I was so lucky to be born into such a body? In New York City of all places? Just by being born in such a way on this planet was an amazing success<br>
 
So what else is there? The fact is that most of us, including me, have a hard time being happy with such ready-made success. We quickly adapt and want so much more out of life. It's not wars or disease that kill us. It's the minor inconveniences that add up in life. It's the times we feel slighted or betrayed. Or even slightly betrayed. Or overcharged. Or we miss a train. Or it's raining today. Or the dishwasher doesn't work. Or the supermarket doesn't have the food we like. We forget how good the snow tasted when we were kids. Now we want gourmet food at every meal<br>
Let ''S'' be a [[multiplicatively closed subset]] of a ring ''R'', i.e. for any ''s'' and ''t'' ∈ ''S'', the product ''st'' is also in ''S'', and <math>0 \not\in S</math> and <math>1 \in S</math>. Then the '''localization of ''R'' with respect to ''S''''', denoted ''S''<sup>&minus;1</sup>''R'', is defined to be the following ring: as a set, it consists of [[equivalence relation|equivalence classes]] of pairs (''m'', ''s''), where ''m'' ∈ ''R'' and ''s'' ∈ ''S''. Two such pairs (''m'', ''s'') and (''n'', ''t'') are considered equivalent if there is a third element ''u'' of ''S'' such that
Taking a step back, doing the Daily Practice I outline in the question above. For me, the results of that bring me happiness. That's success. Today. And hopefully tomorrow<br>
:''u''(''sn''-''tm'') = 0
6. You advocate not sending kids to college. What if kids grow up and then blame their parents about not letting them get a college education<br>
(The presence of ''u'' is crucial to the transitivity of ~) It is common to denote these equivalence classes
I went to one of my kid's music recitals yesterday. She was happy to see me. I hugged her afterwards. She played "the star wars theme" on the clarinet. I wish I could've played that for my parents. My other daughter has a dance recital in a few weeks. I tried to give her tips but she laughed at me. I was quite the breakdancer in my youth. The nerdiest breakdancer on the planet. I want to be present for them. To love them. To let them always know that in their own dark moments, they know I will listen to them. I love them. Even when they cry and don't always agree with me. Even when they laugh at me because sometimes I act like a clown<br>
:<math>\frac{m}{s}</math>.
Later, if they want to blame me for anything at all then I will still love them. That's my "what if"<br>
Thus, ''S'' consists of "denominators".
Two posts<br>
 
I want my daughters to be lesbian<br>
To make this set a ring, define
Advice I want to give my daughter<br><br><br>
:<math>\frac{m}{s} + \frac{n}{t} := \frac{tm+sn}{st}</math>
7. Four of your favorite posts from The Altucher Confidential<br>
and
As soon as I publish a post I get scared to death. Is it good? Will people re-tweet? Will one part of the audience of this blog like it at the expense of another part of the audience. Will I get Facebook Likes? I have to stop clinging to these things but you also need to respect the audience. I don't know. It's a little bit confusing to me. I don't have the confidence of a real writer yet<br>
:<math>\frac{m}{s} \frac{n}{t} := \frac{m n}{s t}</math>
Here are four of my favorites<br>
It is straightforward to check that the definition is well-defined, i.e. independent of choices of representatives of fractions. One then checks that the two operations are in fact addition and multiplication (associativity, etc) and that they are compatible (that is, distribution law). This step is also straightforward. The zero element is <math>0/1</math> and the unity is <math>1/1</math>; they are usually simply denoted by ''0'' and ''1''.
How I screwed Yasser Arafat out of $2mm (and lost another $100mm in the process<br>
 
It's Your Fault<br>
Finally, there is a canonical map <math>j: R \to S^{-1}R, m \mapsto m/1</math>. (In general, it is not injective; if two elements of ''R'' differ by a nonzero zero-divisor with an annihilator in ''S'', they have the same image by very definition.) The above mentioned universal property is the following: ''j'' : ''R'' → ''R*'' maps every element of ''S'' to a unit in ''R*'' (since (1/s)(s/1) = 1), and if ''f'' : ''R'' → ''T'' is some other ring homomorphism which maps every element of ''S'' to a unit in ''T'', then there exists a unique ring homomorphism ''g'' : ''R*'' → ''T'' such that ''f'' = ''g ○ j''
I'm Guilty of Torturing Wome<br>
 
The Girl Whose Name Was a Curs<br>
If ''R'' has no nonzero zero-divisors (i.e., ''R'' is an integral domain), then the equivalence (''m'', ''s'') ~ (''n'', ''t'') reduces to
Although these three are favorites I really don't post anything unless it's my favorite of that moment<br>
:''sn'' = ''tm''
8. 3 must-read books for aspiring entrepreneurs<br>
which is precisely the condition we get when we formally clear out the denominators in <math>\frac{m}{s} = \frac{n}{t}</math>. This motivates the definition above. In fact, the localization recovers the construction of the [[field of fractions]] as follows. Since the zero ideal is prime, its complement ''S'' is multiplicatively closed. The localization <math>S^{-1} R</math> then consists of <math>r/s, r \in R, s \in R^\times</math>. That is, <math>S^{-1} R</math> is precisely the field of fractions ''K'' of ''R''. Since there is no nonzero zero-divisor, the canonical map <math>m \to m/1</math> is an inclusion and one can view ''R'' as a subring of ''K''. Indeed, any localization of an integral domain is a subring of the field of fractions (cf. [[overring]]).
The key in an entrepreneur book: you want to learn business. You want to learn how to honestly communicate with your customers. You want to stand out<br>
 
The Essays of Warren Buffett by Lawrence Cunningha<br>
If ''S'' equals the complement of a [[prime ideal]] ''p'' ⊂ ''R'' (which is multiplicatively closed by definition of prime ideals), then the localization is denoted ''R''<sub>''p''</sub>. If ''S'' consists of all powers of a nonzero nilpotent ''f'', then <math>S^{-1}R</math>is denoted by either <math>R_f</math> or <math>R[f^{-1}].</math>
"The Thank you Economy" by Gary Vaynerchu<br>
 
"Purple cow" by Seth Godi<br>
Another way to describe the localization of a ring ''R'' at a subset ''S'' is via [[category theory]]. If ''R'' is a [[ring (mathematics)|ring]] and ''S'' is a subset, consider the set of all ''R''-algebras ''A'', so that, under the canonical homomorphism ''R'' → ''A'', every element of ''S'' is mapped to a ''unit''. The elements of this set form the objects of a [[category (mathematics)|category]], with ''R''-algebra homomorphisms as morphisms. Then, the localization of ''R'' at ''S'' is the [[initial object]] of this category.
9. I love your writing, so do so many others out there. Who are your favorite writers<br>
 
"Jesus's Son" by Denis Johnson is the best collection of short stories ever written. I'm afraid I really don't like his novels though<br>
=== Localization of a module ===
"Tangents" by M. Prado. A beautiful series of graphic stories about relationships<br>
The construction above applies to a module <math>M</math> over a ring <math>R</math> except that instead of multiplication we define the scalar multiplication by
Other writers: Miranda July, Ariel Leve, Mary Gaitskill, Charles Bukowski, [http://www.pcs-systems.co.uk/Images/celinebag.aspx Celine Bag Online], Sam Lipsyte, William Vollmann, Raymond Carver. Arthur Nersesian. Stephen Dubner<br><br>
:<math>a \cdot \frac{m}{s} := \frac{a m}{s}</math>
(Bukowski<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br>
Then <math>S^{-1} M</math> is a <math>R</math>-module consisting of <math>m/s</math> with the operations defined above. As above, there is a canonical module homomorphism
Many writers are only really good storytellers. Most writers come out of a cardboard factory MFA system and lack a real voice. A real voice is where every word exposes ten levels of hypocrisy in the world and brings us all the way back to see reality. The writers above have their own voices, their own pains, and their unique ways of expressing those pains. Some of them are funny. Some a little more dark. I wish I could write 1/10 as good as any of them<br><br>
::&phi;: ''M'' &rarr; ''S''<sup>&minus;1</sup>''M''
10. You are a prolific writer. Do you have any hacks that help you write a lot in little time<br>
:mapping
Coffee, plus everything else coffee does for you first thing in the [http://Search.Un.org/search?ie=utf8&site=un_org&output=xml_no_dtd&client=UN_Website_en&num=10&lr=lang_en&proxystylesheet=UN_Website_en&oe=utf8&q=morning&Submit=Go morning]<br>
::&phi;(''m'') = ''m'' / 1.
Only write about things you either love or hate. But if you hate something, try to find a tiny gem buried in the bag of dirt so you can reach in when nobody is looking and put that gem in your pocket. Stealing a diamond in all the shit around us and then giving it away for free via writing is a nice little hack, Being fearless precisely when you are most scared is the best hack<br><br>
 
11. I totally get and love your idea about bleeding as a writer, appreciate if you share more with the readers of this blog<br>
The same notations for the localization of a ring are used for modules: <math>M_\mathfrak{p}</math> denote the localization of ''M'' at a prime ideal <math>\mathfrak{p}</math> and <math>M_f</math> the localization of a non-nilpotent element ''f''.
Most people worry about what other people think of them. Most people worry about their health. Most people are at a crossroads and don't know how to take the next step and which road to take it on. Everyone is in a perpetual state of 'where do I put my foot next'. Nobody, including me, can avoid that<br>
 
You and I both need to wash our faces in the morning, brush our teeth, shower, shit, eat, fight the weather, fight the colds that want to attack us if we're not ready. Fight loneliness or learn how to love and appreciate the people who want to love you back. And learn how to forgive and love the people who are even more stupid and cruel than we are. We're afraid to tell each other these things because they are all both disgusting and true<br>
By the very definitions, the localization of the module is tightly linked to the one of the ring via the [[tensor product]]
You and I both have the same color blood. If I cut my wrist open you can see the color of my blood. You look at it and see that it's the same color as yours. We have something in common. It doesn't have to be shameful. It's just red. Now we're friends. No matter whom you are or where you are from. I didn't have to lie to you to get you to be my friend<br>
:''S''<sup>&minus;1</sup>''M'' = ''M'' ⊗<sub>''R''</sub>''S''<sup>&minus;1</sup>''R'',
Related Links<br>
This way of thinking about localising is often referred to as [[extension of scalars]].
How to be a Psychic in Ten Easy Lesson<br>
 
My New Year's Resolution in 199<br><br><br>
As a tensor product, the localization satisfies the usual [[universal property]].{{Clarify|date=March 2012}}
12. What is your advice for young entrepreneurs<br>
 
Only build something you really want to use yourself. There's got to be one thing you are completely desperate for and no matter where you look you can't find it. Nobody has invented it yet. So there you go - you invent it. If there's other people like you, you have a business. Else. You fail. Then do it again. Until it works. One day it will<br>
== Examples and applications ==
Follow these 100 Rules<br>
 
The 100 Rules for Being a Good Entrepreneur<br>
* Given a commutative ring ''R'', we can consider the [[multiplicative set]] ''S'' of non-zerodivisors (i.e. elements ''a'' of ''R'' such that multiplication by ''a'' is an injection from ''R'' into itself.) The ring ''S''<sup>&minus;1</sup>''R'' is called the '''[[total quotient ring]]''' of ''R''. ''S'' is the largest multiplicative set such that the canonical mapping from ''R'' to ''S''<sup>&minus;1</sup>''R'' is injective. When ''R'' is an integral domain, this is none other than the fraction field of ''R''.
And, in particular this<br>
* The ring [[modular arithmetic|'''Z'''/''n'''''Z''']] where ''n'' is [[composite number|composite]] is not an integral domain. When ''n'' is a [[prime number|prime]] power it is a finite [[local ring]], and its elements are either units or [[nilpotent]]. This implies it can be localized only to a zero ring. But when ''n'' can be factorised as ''ab'' with ''a'' and ''b'' [[coprime]] and greater than 1, then '''Z'''/''n'''''Z''' is by the [[Chinese remainder theorem]] isomorphic to '''Z'''/''a'''''Z''' &times; '''Z'''/''b'''''Z'''. If we take ''S'' to consist only of (1,0) and 1 = (1,1), then the corresponding localization is '''Z'''/''a'''''Z'''.
The Easiest Way to Succeed as an Entrepreneu<br>
* Let ''R'' = '''Z''', and ''p'' a prime number. If ''S'' = '''Z''' - ''p'''''Z''', then ''R''* is the localization of the integers at ''p''.
In my just released book I have more chapters on my experiences as an entrepreneur<br>
* As a generalization of the previous example, let ''R'' be a commutative ring and let ''p'' be a prime ideal of ''R''. Then ''R'' - ''p'' is a multiplicative system and the corresponding localization is denoted ''R<sub>p</sub>''. The unique maximal ideal is then ''p''.
13. I advocate the concept of working at a job while building your business. You have of course lived it. Now as you look back, what is your take on this? Is it possible to make it work while sailing on two boats<br><br>
* Let ''R'' be a commutative ring and ''f'' an element of ''R''. we can consider the multiplicative system {''f<sup>n</sup>'' : ''n'' = 0,1,...}. Then the localization intuitively is just the ring obtained by inverting powers of ''f''. If ''f'' is nilpotent, the localization is the zero ring.
Your boss wants everything out of you. He wants you to work 80 hours a week. He wants to look good taking credit for your work. He wants your infinite loyalty. So you need something back<br>
 
Exploit your employer. It's the best way to get good experience, clients, contacts. It's a legal way to steal. It's a fast way to be an entrepreneur because you see what large companies with infinite money are willing to pay for. If you can provide that, you make millions. It's how many great businesses have started and will always start. It's how every exit I've had started<br>
Two classes of localizations occur commonly in [[commutative algebra]] and [[algebraic geometry]] and are used to construct the rings of functions on [[open set|open subsets]] in [[Zariski topology]] of the [[spectrum of a ring]], Spec(''R'').
14. Who is a "person with true moral fiber"? In current times are there any role models who are people with true moral fiber<br><br><br>
 
I don't really know the answer. I think I know a few people like that. I hope I'm someone like that. And I pray to god the people I'm invested in are like that and my family is like that<br>
* The set ''S'' consists of all powers of a given element ''r''. The localization corresponds to restriction to the Zariski open subset ''U''<sub>''r''</sub> ⊂ Spec(''R'') where the function ''r'' is non-zero (the sets of this form are called ''principal Zariski open sets''). For example, if ''R'' = ''K''[''X''] is the [[polynomial ring]] and ''r'' = ''X'' then the localization produces the ring of [[Laurent polynomial]]s ''K''[''X'', ''X''<sup>&minus;1</sup>]. In this case, localization corresponds to the embedding ''U'' ⊂ ''A''<sup>1</sup>, where ''A''<sup>1</sup> is the affine line and ''U'' is its Zariski open subset which is the complement of 0.
I find most people to be largely mean and stupid, a vile combination. It's not that I'm pessimistic or cynical. I'm very much an optimist. It's just reality. Open the newspaper or turn on the TV and watch these people<br>
 
Moral fiber atrophies more quickly than any muscle on the body. An exercise I do every morning is to promise myself that "I'm going to save a life today" and then leave it in the hands of the Universe to direct me how I can best do that. Through that little exercise plus the Daily Practice described above I hope to keep regenerating that fiber<br><br>
* The set ''S'' is the [[complement (set theory)|complement]] of a given [[prime ideal]] ''P'' in ''R''. The primality of ''P'' implies that ''S'' is a multiplicatively closed set. In this case, one also speaks of the "localization at ''P''". Localization corresponds to restriction to the complement ''U'' in Spec(''R'') of the [[irreducible component|irreducible]] Zariski closed subset ''V''(''P'') defined by the prime ideal ''P''.
15.   Your message to the readers of this blog<br>
 
Skip dinner. But follow me on Twitter.<br><br><br><br>
== Properties ==
Read more posts on The Altucher Confidential �
 
More from The Altucher Confidentia<br>
Some properties of the localization ''R*'' = ''S''<sup>&nbsp;&minus;1</sup>''R'':
Life is Like a Game. Here�s How You Master ANY Gam<br><br>
 
Step By Step Guide to Make $10 Million And Then Totally Blow <br><br>
* The ring homomorphism ''R'' → ''S''<sup>&nbsp;&minus;1</sup>''R'' is injective if and only if ''S'' does not contain any [[zero divisor]]s.
Can You Do One Page a Day?
* There is a [[bijection]] between the set of prime ideals of ''S''<sup>&minus;1</sup>''R'' and the set of prime ideals of ''R'' which do not intersect ''S''. This bijection is induced by the given homomorphism ''R'' → ''S''<sup>&nbsp;&minus;1</sup>''R''.
* In particular: after localization at a prime ideal ''P'', one obtains a [[local ring]], or in other words, a ring with one maximal ideal, namely the ideal generated by the extension of P.
 
The localization of a module <math>M \to S^{-1}M</math> is a functor from the category of ''R''-modules to the category of <math>S^{-1}R</math>-modules. From the definition, one can see that it is [[exact functor|exact]], or in other words (reading this in the tensor product) that ''S''<sup>&minus;1</sup>''R'' is a [[flat module]] over ''R''. This is actually foundational for the use of flatness in algebraic geometry, saying in particular that the inclusion of an [[open set]] in Spec(''R'') (see [[spectrum of a ring]]) is a [[flat morphism]].
 
The localization functor (usually) preserves Hom and tensor products in the following sense: the natural map
:<math>S^{-1}(M \otimes_R N) \to S^{-1}M \otimes_{S^{-1}R} S^{-1}N</math>
is an isomorphism and if <math>M</math> is finitely generated, the natural map
:<math>\operatorname{Hom}_R S^{-1}(M, N) \to \operatorname{Hom}_{S^{-1}R} (S^{-1}M, S^{-1}N)</math>
is an isomorphism.
 
If a module ''M'' is a [[finitely generated module|finitely generated]] over ''R'', we have: <math>S^{-1} M = 0</math> if and only if <math>t M = 0</math> for some <math>t \in S</math> if and only if <math>S</math> intersects the annihilator of ''M''.<ref>Borel, AG. 3.1</ref>
 
Let ''R'' be an integral domain with the field of fractions ''K''. Then its localization <math>R_\mathfrak{p}</math> at a prime ideal <math>\mathfrak{p}</math> can be viewed as a subring of ''K''. Moreover,
:<math>R = \cap_\mathfrak{p} R_\mathfrak{p} = \cap_\mathfrak{m} R_\mathfrak{m}</math>
where the first intersection is over all prime ideals and the second over the maximal ideals.<ref>Matsumura, Theorem 4.7</ref>
 
Let <math>\sqrt{I}</math> denote the radical of an ideal ''I'' in ''R''. Then
:<math>\sqrt{I} \cdot S^{-1}R = \sqrt{I \cdot S^{-1}R}</math>
In particular, ''R'' is [[reduced ring|reduced]] if and only if its total ring of fractions is reduced.<ref>Borel, AG. 3.3</ref>
 
== Stability under localization ==
Many properties of a ring are stable under localization. For example, the localization of a noetherian ring (resp. principal ideal domain) is noetherian (resp. principal ideal domain). The localization of an integrally closed domain is an integrally closed domain. In many cases, the converse also holds. (See below)
 
== Local property ==
 
Let ''M'' be a ''R''-module. We could think of two kinds of what it means some property ''P'' holds for ''M'' at a prime ideal <math>\mathfrak{p}</math>. One means that '' P'' holds for <math>M_\mathfrak{p}</math>; the other means that ''P'' holds for a neighborhood of <math>\mathfrak{p}</math>. The first interpretation is more common.<ref>Matsumura, a remark after Theorem 4.5</ref> But for many properties the first and second interpretations coincide. Explicitly, the second means the following conditions are equivalent.
*(i) ''P'' holds for ''M''.
*(ii) ''P'' holds for <math>M_\mathfrak{p}</math> for all prime ideal <math>\mathfrak{p}</math> of ''R''.
*(iii) ''P'' holds for <math>M_\mathfrak{m}</math> for all maximal ideal <math>\mathfrak{m}</math> of ''R''.
Then the following are local properties in the second sense.
* ''M'' is zero.
* ''M'' is torsion-free (when ''R'' is a domain)
* ''M'' is [[flat module|flat]].
* ''M'' is [[invertible|invertible module]] (when ''R'' is a domain and ''M'' is a submodule of the field of fractions of ''R'')
* <math>f: M \to N</math> is injective (resp. surjective) when ''N'' is another ''R''-module.
 
On the other hand, some properties are not local properties. For example, "noetherian" is (in general) not a local property: that is, to say there is a non-noetherian ring whose localization at every maximal ideal is noetherian: this example is due to Nagata.{{Citation needed|date=March 2012}}
 
== Support ==
 
The '''support of the module''' ''M'' is the set of prime ideals ''p'' such that ''M''<sub>''p''</sub> ≠ 0. Viewing ''M'' as a function from the [[spectrum of a ring|spectrum]] of ''R'' to ''R''-modules, mapping
:<math>p \mapsto M_p</math>
this corresponds to the [[support (mathematics)|support]] of a function.
 
==(Quasi-)coherent sheaves==
In terms of localization of modules, one can define [[quasi-coherent sheaf|quasi-coherent sheaves]] and [[coherent sheaf|coherent sheaves]] on [[locally ringed space]]s. In algebraic geometry, the '''quasi-coherent''' ''O''<sub>''X''</sub>-'''modules''' for [[scheme (mathematics)|scheme]]s ''X'' are those that are locally modelled on sheaves on Spec(''R'') of localizations of any ''R''-module ''M''. A '''coherent''' ''O''<sub>''X''</sub>-'''module''' is such a sheaf, locally modelled on a [[finitely-presented module]] over ''R''.
 
== Non-commutative case ==
Localizing [[non-commutative ring]]s is more difficult; the localization does not exist for every set ''S'' of prospective units. One condition which ensures that the localization exists is the [[Ore condition]].
 
One case for non-commutative rings where localization has a clear interest is for rings of differential operators. It has the interpretation, for example, of adjoining a formal inverse ''D''<sup>&minus;1</sup> for a differentiation operator D. This is done in many contexts in methods for [[differential equation]]s. There is now a large mathematical theory about it, named [[microlocal analysis|microlocalization]], connecting with numerous other branches. The ''micro-'' tag is to do with connections with [[Fourier theory]], in particular.
 
== See also ==
* [[Completion (ring theory)]]
* [[Valuation ring]]
* [[Overring]]
 
=== Localization ===
[[:Category:Localization (mathematics)]]
* [[Local analysis]]
* [[Localization of a category]]
* [[Localization of a ring]]
* [[Localization of a module]]
* [[Localization of a topological space]]
* [[Local ring]]
 
== Notes ==
{{reflist}}
 
== References ==
*[[Armand Borel|Borel, Armand]]. Linear Algebraic Groups (2nd ed.). New York: Springer-Verlag. ISBN 0-387-97370-2.
* [[Serge Lang]], "Algebraic Number Theory," Springer, 2000. pages 3&ndash;4.
 
[[Category:Localization (mathematics)]]
[[Category:Module theory]]
[[Category:Commutative algebra]]
[[Category:Ring theory]]
 
[[de:Lokalisierung (Algebra)]]
[[fr:Localisation (mathématique)]]
[[ko:국소화 (환론)]]
[[zh:環的局部化]]

Revision as of 14:43, 4 August 2013

In commutative algebra and algebraic geometry, the localization is a formal way to introduce the "denominators" to given a ring or a module. That is, it introduces a new ring/module out of an existing one so that it consists of fractions

ms.

where the denominators s range in a given subset S of R. The basic example is the construction of the ring Q of rational numbers from the ring Z of rational integers.

The technique has become fundamental, particularly in algebraic geometry, as it provides a natural link to sheaf theory. In fact, the term localization originates in algebraic geometry: if R is a ring of functions defined on some geometric object (algebraic variety) V, and one wants to study this variety "locally" near a point p, then one considers the set S of all functions which are not zero at p and localizes R with respect to S. The resulting ring R* contains only information about the behavior of V near p. Cf. the example given at local ring.

An important related process is completion: one often localizes a ring/module, then completes.

In this article, a ring is commutative with unity.

Construction

Localization of a ring

Given a ring R and a subset S, one wants to construct some ring R* and ring homomorphism from R to R*, such that the image of S consists of units (invertible elements) in R*. Further one wants R* to be the 'best possible' or 'most general' way to do this – in the usual fashion this should be expressed by a universal property.

Let S be a multiplicatively closed subset of a ring R, i.e. for any s and tS, the product st is also in S, and 0∉S and 1S. Then the localization of R with respect to S, denoted S−1R, is defined to be the following ring: as a set, it consists of equivalence classes of pairs (m, s), where mR and sS. Two such pairs (m, s) and (n, t) are considered equivalent if there is a third element u of S such that

u(sn-tm) = 0

(The presence of u is crucial to the transitivity of ~) It is common to denote these equivalence classes

ms.

Thus, S consists of "denominators".

To make this set a ring, define

ms+nt:=tm+snst

and

msnt:=mnst

It is straightforward to check that the definition is well-defined, i.e. independent of choices of representatives of fractions. One then checks that the two operations are in fact addition and multiplication (associativity, etc) and that they are compatible (that is, distribution law). This step is also straightforward. The zero element is 0/1 and the unity is 1/1; they are usually simply denoted by 0 and 1.

Finally, there is a canonical map j:RS1R,mm/1. (In general, it is not injective; if two elements of R differ by a nonzero zero-divisor with an annihilator in S, they have the same image by very definition.) The above mentioned universal property is the following: j : RR* maps every element of S to a unit in R* (since (1/s)(s/1) = 1), and if f : RT is some other ring homomorphism which maps every element of S to a unit in T, then there exists a unique ring homomorphism g : R*T such that f = g ○ j

If R has no nonzero zero-divisors (i.e., R is an integral domain), then the equivalence (m, s) ~ (n, t) reduces to

sn = tm

which is precisely the condition we get when we formally clear out the denominators in ms=nt. This motivates the definition above. In fact, the localization recovers the construction of the field of fractions as follows. Since the zero ideal is prime, its complement S is multiplicatively closed. The localization S1R then consists of r/s,rR,sR×. That is, S1R is precisely the field of fractions K of R. Since there is no nonzero zero-divisor, the canonical map mm/1 is an inclusion and one can view R as a subring of K. Indeed, any localization of an integral domain is a subring of the field of fractions (cf. overring).

If S equals the complement of a prime ideal pR (which is multiplicatively closed by definition of prime ideals), then the localization is denoted Rp. If S consists of all powers of a nonzero nilpotent f, then S1Ris denoted by either Rf or R[f1].

Another way to describe the localization of a ring R at a subset S is via category theory. If R is a ring and S is a subset, consider the set of all R-algebras A, so that, under the canonical homomorphism RA, every element of S is mapped to a unit. The elements of this set form the objects of a category, with R-algebra homomorphisms as morphisms. Then, the localization of R at S is the initial object of this category.

Localization of a module

The construction above applies to a module M over a ring R except that instead of multiplication we define the scalar multiplication by

ams:=ams

Then S1M is a R-module consisting of m/s with the operations defined above. As above, there is a canonical module homomorphism

φ: MS−1M
mapping
φ(m) = m / 1.

The same notations for the localization of a ring are used for modules: Mp denote the localization of M at a prime ideal p and Mf the localization of a non-nilpotent element f.

By the very definitions, the localization of the module is tightly linked to the one of the ring via the tensor product

S−1M = MRS−1R,

This way of thinking about localising is often referred to as extension of scalars.

As a tensor product, the localization satisfies the usual universal property.Template:Clarify

Examples and applications

  • Given a commutative ring R, we can consider the multiplicative set S of non-zerodivisors (i.e. elements a of R such that multiplication by a is an injection from R into itself.) The ring S−1R is called the total quotient ring of R. S is the largest multiplicative set such that the canonical mapping from R to S−1R is injective. When R is an integral domain, this is none other than the fraction field of R.
  • The ring Z/nZ where n is composite is not an integral domain. When n is a prime power it is a finite local ring, and its elements are either units or nilpotent. This implies it can be localized only to a zero ring. But when n can be factorised as ab with a and b coprime and greater than 1, then Z/nZ is by the Chinese remainder theorem isomorphic to Z/aZ × Z/bZ. If we take S to consist only of (1,0) and 1 = (1,1), then the corresponding localization is Z/aZ.
  • Let R = Z, and p a prime number. If S = Z - pZ, then R* is the localization of the integers at p.
  • As a generalization of the previous example, let R be a commutative ring and let p be a prime ideal of R. Then R - p is a multiplicative system and the corresponding localization is denoted Rp. The unique maximal ideal is then p.
  • Let R be a commutative ring and f an element of R. we can consider the multiplicative system {fn : n = 0,1,...}. Then the localization intuitively is just the ring obtained by inverting powers of f. If f is nilpotent, the localization is the zero ring.

Two classes of localizations occur commonly in commutative algebra and algebraic geometry and are used to construct the rings of functions on open subsets in Zariski topology of the spectrum of a ring, Spec(R).

  • The set S consists of all powers of a given element r. The localization corresponds to restriction to the Zariski open subset Ur ⊂ Spec(R) where the function r is non-zero (the sets of this form are called principal Zariski open sets). For example, if R = K[X] is the polynomial ring and r = X then the localization produces the ring of Laurent polynomials K[X, X−1]. In this case, localization corresponds to the embedding UA1, where A1 is the affine line and U is its Zariski open subset which is the complement of 0.
  • The set S is the complement of a given prime ideal P in R. The primality of P implies that S is a multiplicatively closed set. In this case, one also speaks of the "localization at P". Localization corresponds to restriction to the complement U in Spec(R) of the irreducible Zariski closed subset V(P) defined by the prime ideal P.

Properties

Some properties of the localization R* = S −1R:

  • The ring homomorphism RS −1R is injective if and only if S does not contain any zero divisors.
  • There is a bijection between the set of prime ideals of S−1R and the set of prime ideals of R which do not intersect S. This bijection is induced by the given homomorphism RS −1R.
  • In particular: after localization at a prime ideal P, one obtains a local ring, or in other words, a ring with one maximal ideal, namely the ideal generated by the extension of P.

The localization of a module MS1M is a functor from the category of R-modules to the category of S1R-modules. From the definition, one can see that it is exact, or in other words (reading this in the tensor product) that S−1R is a flat module over R. This is actually foundational for the use of flatness in algebraic geometry, saying in particular that the inclusion of an open set in Spec(R) (see spectrum of a ring) is a flat morphism.

The localization functor (usually) preserves Hom and tensor products in the following sense: the natural map

S1(MRN)S1MS1RS1N

is an isomorphism and if M is finitely generated, the natural map

HomRS1(M,N)HomS1R(S1M,S1N)

is an isomorphism.

If a module M is a finitely generated over R, we have: S1M=0 if and only if tM=0 for some tS if and only if S intersects the annihilator of M.[1]

Let R be an integral domain with the field of fractions K. Then its localization Rp at a prime ideal p can be viewed as a subring of K. Moreover,

R=pRp=mRm

where the first intersection is over all prime ideals and the second over the maximal ideals.[2]

Let I denote the radical of an ideal I in R. Then

IS1R=IS1R

In particular, R is reduced if and only if its total ring of fractions is reduced.[3]

Stability under localization

Many properties of a ring are stable under localization. For example, the localization of a noetherian ring (resp. principal ideal domain) is noetherian (resp. principal ideal domain). The localization of an integrally closed domain is an integrally closed domain. In many cases, the converse also holds. (See below)

Local property

Let M be a R-module. We could think of two kinds of what it means some property P holds for M at a prime ideal p. One means that P holds for Mp; the other means that P holds for a neighborhood of p. The first interpretation is more common.[4] But for many properties the first and second interpretations coincide. Explicitly, the second means the following conditions are equivalent.

  • (i) P holds for M.
  • (ii) P holds for Mp for all prime ideal p of R.
  • (iii) P holds for Mm for all maximal ideal m of R.

Then the following are local properties in the second sense.

  • M is zero.
  • M is torsion-free (when R is a domain)
  • M is flat.
  • M is invertible module (when R is a domain and M is a submodule of the field of fractions of R)
  • f:MN is injective (resp. surjective) when N is another R-module.

On the other hand, some properties are not local properties. For example, "noetherian" is (in general) not a local property: that is, to say there is a non-noetherian ring whose localization at every maximal ideal is noetherian: this example is due to Nagata.Potter or Ceramic Artist Truman Bedell from Rexton, has interests which include ceramics, best property developers in singapore developers in singapore and scrabble. Was especially enthused after visiting Alejandro de Humboldt National Park.

Support

The support of the module M is the set of prime ideals p such that Mp ≠ 0. Viewing M as a function from the spectrum of R to R-modules, mapping

pMp

this corresponds to the support of a function.

(Quasi-)coherent sheaves

In terms of localization of modules, one can define quasi-coherent sheaves and coherent sheaves on locally ringed spaces. In algebraic geometry, the quasi-coherent OX-modules for schemes X are those that are locally modelled on sheaves on Spec(R) of localizations of any R-module M. A coherent OX-module is such a sheaf, locally modelled on a finitely-presented module over R.

Non-commutative case

Localizing non-commutative rings is more difficult; the localization does not exist for every set S of prospective units. One condition which ensures that the localization exists is the Ore condition.

One case for non-commutative rings where localization has a clear interest is for rings of differential operators. It has the interpretation, for example, of adjoining a formal inverse D−1 for a differentiation operator D. This is done in many contexts in methods for differential equations. There is now a large mathematical theory about it, named microlocalization, connecting with numerous other branches. The micro- tag is to do with connections with Fourier theory, in particular.

See also

Localization

Category:Localization (mathematics)

Notes

43 year old Petroleum Engineer Harry from Deep River, usually spends time with hobbies and interests like renting movies, property developers in singapore new condominium and vehicle racing. Constantly enjoys going to destinations like Camino Real de Tierra Adentro.

References

  • Borel, Armand. Linear Algebraic Groups (2nd ed.). New York: Springer-Verlag. ISBN 0-387-97370-2.
  • Serge Lang, "Algebraic Number Theory," Springer, 2000. pages 3–4.

de:Lokalisierung (Algebra) fr:Localisation (mathématique) ko:국소화 (환론) zh:環的局部化

  1. Borel, AG. 3.1
  2. Matsumura, Theorem 4.7
  3. Borel, AG. 3.3
  4. Matsumura, a remark after Theorem 4.5